[bisq-network/compensation] For Cycle 23 (#819)

[Christoph Atteneder]

@wallclockbuilder Please don't create test scripts on your own for new releases, as it leads to unnecessary testing cycles. In this case you were testing for v1.6.1 account creation, but the changes in the release https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/releases/tag/v1.6.1 didn't touch this part of the code at all. The amount for release testing of v1.6.0 also seems to be higher than what we compensated in the past for this work.

Thanks for doing code reviews as well, but here are a couple of remarks to your reviews. I think if you leave an ACK or utACK at a PR it would be good to add what you tested or reviewed in more detail. Otherwise it is quite hard to evaluate without some track record in the project if the compensation request asked for does match your review work.

- https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/pull/5356: Why was the code review for this PR so much more effort?
- https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/pull/5353: What did you ACK or tested? (only a file was deleted in this PR)
- https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/pull/5354: In this case where the review amount exceeds the amount of the contribution I think the amount is out of proportion.

Looking at https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/pull/5288 an other CRs I don't think this amount requested is just.


https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues/5305: We very rarely accepted the issue creation for compensation in the past and only if there was extensive testing back and forth between developers and reporters.


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/compensation/issues/819#issuecomment-813599053
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210405/99786da5/attachment.htm>