On Sun, 02 Apr 2006, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Sun, April 2, 2006 02:04, Don Armstrong wrote: > > the latter > > is just a matter of AMs being more agressive in putting people who are > > taking a long time to complete the process on hold. > > You want to put limits on the time applicants spend in the queue, > but how useful is this if there's no real progress at the end?
There have always been some limits on the time applicants spend in the queue; the time at the end of the time is a function of the availability of the DAM. > I've tried to make everything as quick as possible, I've done all > that I need to do. But I now need to wait for an undefined period, > at least half a year, for no good reason. You've only been in the FD review process for a month and ten days now; that queue is only ~10 people long, and the DAM queue is ~15. The reason is that your application has to be reviewed carefully by the FD and the DAM, and any holes in your application that the AM missed filed in. Frankly, waiting a few months in the DAM phase isn't really a big deal, as it allows time for the DAMs who are busy with other important things time to resolve your application. Your AM and normal sponsors are available to sponsor uploads to the archive anyway.[1] > What are you doing to reduce the DAM queue? I'm an AM. I've got applicants who are there. I don't have time to serve as a DAM, so I've never volunteered for it. Don Armstrong 1: I mean, I was there for 8 months, and I was still visible doing stuff for Debian... -- He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities, and seals them neatly away so that they don't upset people. Nature, in fact, abhors a lot of things, including vacuums, ships called the Marie Celeste, and the chuck keys for electric drills. -- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p166 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
