Sounds workable.
Thanks for creating the petition, however, I notice that the parts of the template asking about availability to help with the implementation were not filled out. Those are important to know where the petition stands!
It said it was “Not obligatory,” that’s why I didn’t include it. If I had the necessary technical skills, I’d help and mention it for sure. I’d do half of these petitions if I had the skills since I have time 
3 Likes
I think we should make these questions mandatory, as a way to reaffirm the expectation that we do need someone to help with the implementation or the petition is not likely to see much movement. cc @wadestriebel what do you guys think about that change?
I would think omission of those details should be treated as a “No” unless user specifcally says how/if they can help. That’s how I see it and understood. But I’m OK making it mandatory.
Is it even possible to make a section mandatory or something we should monitor and ask for?
1 Like
“help with implementation” can include testing and docs. You can make it clear that it’s not just code that is needed.
4 Likes
Not really possible to enforce this before a thread is created, in this case we would just update the template to indicate that this section should be filled out before making the petition.
In case it helps, it looks like we can use <!-- HTML comments --> in the template to guide the user’s submission, and they won’t be rendered in the final post.
2 Likes