Time line has been fixed so what is required is to find a method of evaluation.
Please leave your ideas so that we can finalize this in next meeting.
My idea is to nominate around 3 FAm and form a committee, who has not connected with a release party held and they evaluate the reports and come to a conclusion. We can ask some other FAms out of the region to join with the committee too.
1.) Keep it impartial is that a good word for no "vested" interests for who succeeds.
2.) I think that the Release Event(s)' report(s) as well as other supportive Wiki and published information should be added as part of the "How to evaluate" criteria.
Lastly, keep it simple. The "value" for this versus what it "costs" us in our finite / valuable time necessitates a clean answer. Food for thought. :)
This ticket was discussed again during the APAC meeting on 2013-04-20. The observation was there isn't anything to decide on this ticket yet. We'd like you to please make a definite proposal. We can then decide on things like picking 3 judges from a proposed set of 5, for example.
For the time being, this ticket is not ready. I'm deleting the meeting keyword. Please add it back when the ticket is at a stage that requires decision making.
This ticket is not valid at this moment.
I close it. Please reopen it if you see it is necessary.
Metadata Update from @tuanta:
- Issue assigned to bckurera
to comment on this ticket.