On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> wrote:
Options as I see them 1/ Continue with the current workflow, patches signed off, passed qa, then into master, with the goal to increase the rate patches are signed off
This is my vote! I know it takes more work and more time for features to be approved, but I'm for a more stable, tested Koha. That said, I am most certainly not for option #4. Chris has done amazing things for Koha, for open source, and for me personally. Without your efforts Chris I wouldn't be a Koha community member today and would have never thought to help get the manual off the ground. I agree that you do look out for the best interests of Koha and I think that a more stable Koha is in the best interests of the software and the community. Nicole