Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes: > Ben Finney <[email protected]> writes: > > It seems to me that the Debian Maintainer role is clearly focussed > > on granting the minimum needed to be a maintainer within the Debian > > project, as opposed to a maintainer not within the Debian project. > > So I don't see your case for wanting to change that term. > > To me a Debian Maintainer is not really within the Debian project, or > at least no more within the Debian project than our many other non-DD > contributors are, such as people with guest accounts on Alioth. They > have no voting rights, no access to debian-private, etc. A necessary > condition to me for being part of a membership organization is to have > some sort of membership role.
I see the Debian Maintainer as having passed a significant threshold for membership in the Debian project. They have: * signed a statement that they acknowledge Debian's founding documents and important policies * demonstrated bona fides for their identity via the GnuPG web of trust * worked with a Debian Developer (a voting member of the project) to the extent that person advocates their membership That makes them significantly more than a package maintainer, to my view. It makes them a non-voting member of the project. > > What's the point of becoming a Debian Maintainer if not to maintain > > one or more packages in Debian? > > So that they can upload a Debian package. They may have no intention > to become the maintainer. That seems strange (why not just get a sponsor to do the upload?), but I'll take your word for it that such people exist. -- \ “There's no excuse to be bored. Sad, yes. Angry, yes. | `\ Depressed, yes. Crazy, yes. But there's no excuse for boredom, | _o__) ever.” —Viggo Mortensen | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
