On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 15:57, David Nalley <david(a)gnsa.us> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 4:15 AM, Mathieu Bridon
> Do people think the role of a mentor is to not validate a candidate
> ambassador until he has sufficient knowledge, using some kind of
> certification mechanism? Or should the mentor rather establish the
> base of a never-ending journey towards getting that knowledge, while
> making sure the candidate is mature enough to either ask for help from
> another ambassador or ask for some more time to answer?
> I'm certainly in favor of the second possibility, but I've only
> mentored 4 people until now, so I'm most certainly doing it wrong. ;)
There is no one who does or can know everything about the Fedora
Project, so I certainly don't think your goal as a mentor is to ensure
that that someone know $incredibleamounr about Fedora. You of course
want to make sure they at least know a bit about Fedora, and more
importantly how to find answers. A number of people refer to this as
The bigger question though (and one that would, in my mind, satisfy
the above points) is: Are you satisfied that the person your are
mentoring is capable of representing Fedora appropriately? It's
completely subjective, but a lot of trust is placed in the hands of
mentors, much as it is with packaging sponsors.
Those were rhetorical questions, sorry if I was unclear.
But thanks for stating more clearly my thoughts about validation and
certification when it comes to ambassadors. :)