Do you think/mean we should just create all our patches with status
"signed-off" ? It's a kind of "shortcut" / "A-developer" isn't it ?
We are currently accepting patches into QA which are signed off by employees of the same company as the author of the patch.
So I'm a bit confused as to why Biblibre cannot adopt a similar procedure in order to get their patches into QA?
Perhaps if the issue is moving patches representing larger/more complicated features through QA, the submitter could provide references to installations/clients currently running the feature(s). The QA manager could then contact the supplied reference to verify QA and push the patch on up the chain.