On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 02:25:09PM -0500, Donald Robertson wrote: > For example, the FSF has not rejected ConnochaetOS; we have never > reviewed the distro because they have never made it to the step where > their application was handed over to us to review. In looking through > the past history it seems they went through several cycles of people > looking at their work, but we at FSF never clarified what the steps of > the process were or where they were at in that process. We were never > clear about how the process was supposed to end.
It sounds like German bureaucracy. You should not be passive, but rather pro-active. Finally your efforts are important and that is why people are contributing to the FSF. There is free software distribution out there and somebody is crying to get endorsed? Don't wait for them to make it to the step where their application is ahdned over to you for review. As if you don't know the steps, don't expect those developers to know the steps either. Be proactive, get in action. What you are doing now is good action. > * When they arrive on the linux-libre mailing list, they will receive an > "application manager", an individual volunteer on the list who wants to > take on the role of ensuring that their application continues to move > forward. If we have many applicants at the same time, there could be > multiple "application managers", but otherwise it could possibly just be > one "application team captain" making sure > things stay on track. In former Yugoslavia they say, too many lazy grandmothers, lazy is going to be the grandchild. It means you certainly do not need too many captains, managers to handle this number of few applications. Very nice to be creative. Just if that creativity is going to be practical and efficient. Jean Louis