29 Mar
2017
29 Mar
'17
4:44 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@bugs.koha-community.org> wrote:
I would not expect a QAer to be paid (by the sponsor of the enh) to review a patch, I'd call that more corruption / conflict of interest than sponsoring :)
Ah. Hadn't thought of it that way. Good point. Not sure there's an easy way around that one, even if the QAer is paid directly by the sponsor. I suppose that's the nature of incentives -- they produce changes in behavior that wouldn't happen otherwise, a process that can be "innocent" or corrupt ... Thanks, Cab