On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 09:24:14AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 08:13:22AM -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit : > > > > But all of that said, it still needs trusted people to review the > > packages, which is where we've traditionally started to have scaling > > problems. > > This is where a public peer-review has an advantage: when submitting and > reviewing a package we are exposed to the reviews of others. People who make > good reviews will build a reputation, and will be natural candidates if we > want > to maintain a team of trusted people who have the last word. And conversly, an > open system lets people try the task and test their commitment before asking > for a responsability. >
I'm possibly confused here. You seem to be advocating popping the decision process from a team of trusted people who have the last word, and pushing it on to a peer-review system. Which can then be used to form a team of trusted people who have the last word. Could you explain? Neil -- <dkscully> doesn't the world come to an end if iDunno shaves? <Maulkin> That's how the dinosaurs died then... <iDunno> and why the dodo was made extinct, the last known habitat for them was my beard... poor bastards didn't stand a chance. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org