On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:52:11PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > But I know that there are/will be DDs which do infrastructure stuff only, and > rarely upload packages. Such DDs should never be regarded as MIA, of course.
I am not convinced of this. Infrastructure contributions are necessary and valuable, but we don't admit people as Debian Developers on the basis of infrastructure contributions, nor to work on infrastructure; they become developers to work on the distribution. I don't think the requirements for continued developership should be so different from the requirements for initial NM acceptance. In particular, I'm concerned about the prospect of developers in such a circumstance coming to view themselves as "infrastructure people", and not as package maintainers, which I think would have a negative impact on the relationship of DDs as peers. I would draw a distinction here between infrastructure vs. documentation and translation, btw, in that in the latter cases, the question of trying to integrate these contributors into the NM process has been brought up numerous times, and I've never heard anyone argue that non-DD contributors to infrastructure should be recognized for their work by being made full DDs. I think all the arguments against doing that (and I can think of a number of them, perhaps you can think of others) are also arguments against people remaining DDs when they only do infrastructure. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org