Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Charles Plessy]

Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:02:34PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz a écrit :
> On 09/15/2010 02:16 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> >>
> >> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
> >>
> >> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
> >>   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
> >>
> >> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
> >>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
> >>
> >> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
> >>   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
> >>   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
> >>   infrastructure.
> > 
> > It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian archive”
> > were removed, it would not close the possibility for the people in charge to
> > restrict upload capacities of developers who do not need them (do-o-cracy),
> > while at the same time it would make the GR more neutral, focusing it on
> > acceptance of new members, without suggesting restriction and therefore
> > difference of status.
> 
> I don't think we should open a second way to get upload rights to the archive,
> so I would *not* want to remove that part.

So do you think that if “albeit without upload access to the Debian archive” is
not present, the GR will prevent you from restricting upload access to the
archive for the DDs who did not pass T&S?

I am looking for a formulation that invites you to do what you want, without
giving a preference for or against the restriction of upload rights.

Cheers,

-- 
Charles


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100916055807.gb22...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Russ Allbery]

Romain Francoise  writes:
> Russ Allbery  writes:

>> I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those
>> sets of permissions that some people have and others don't.  Those who
>> need that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate
>> vetting of their ability to use that access appropriately, just as
>> someone would volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint,
>> or the Lintian maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting,
>> be given additional privileges to do that work.

> In your vision of things, who would be responsible for granting
> these privileges and judging whether someone can be trusted to have
> them?

NM and DAM for unlimited upload access, at least.  I think it may vary
depending on what the permissions are, but for things like that, I don't
see any reason to change who is doing the vetting from the current model.

> I think our current model of giving all DDs access to the whole archive
> if they successfully complete NM works.

I do too when NM includes T&S.  The point is that we have contributors who
aren't interested in packaging and don't have any need or desire to go
through T&S and learn a bunch of information about packaging that they'll
never use.  One shouldn't have to go through that part of NM unless one
wants to have unlimited upload access.

> We have procedures to deal with abuse, and we have tools to review the
> work of others (like the PTS, lintian.d.o, etc). Why move to a culture
> of having to ask permission?

I don't believe giving people unlimited upload access without going
through T&S is a good idea.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k4mmu166@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Romain Francoise]

Russ Allbery  writes:

> I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those sets
> of permissions that some people have and others don't.  Those who need
> that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate vetting of
> their ability to use that access appropriately, just as someone would
> volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint, or the Lintian
> maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting, be given additional
> privileges to do that work.

In your vision of things, who would be responsible for granting
these privileges and judging whether someone can be trusted to have
them?

I think our current model of giving all DDs access to the whole
archive if they successfully complete NM works. We have procedures
to deal with abuse, and we have tools to review the work of others
(like the PTS, lintian.d.o, etc). Why move to a culture of having to
ask permission? In my opinion, it's very valuable that any DD can
decide out of the blue to go on a RC bug fixing spree if they happen
to have the time, as some have done in the past.

Thanks,
-- 
Romain Francoise 
http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8739tau40g@elegiac.orebokech.com

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Bernd Zeimetz]

On 09/15/2010 02:16 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>>
>> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
>>
>> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
>>   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
>>
>> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
>>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
>>
>> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
>>   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
>>   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
>>   infrastructure.
> 
> It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian archive”
> were removed, it would not close the possibility for the people in charge to
> restrict upload capacities of developers who do not need them (do-o-cracy),
> while at the same time it would make the GR more neutral, focusing it on
> acceptance of new members, without suggesting restriction and therefore
> difference of status.

I don't think we should open a second way to get upload rights to the archive,
so I would *not* want to remove that part.



-- 
 Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c91265a.5030...@bzed.de

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:13:12PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> 
> > The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
> > To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
> > including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
> > infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
> > fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
> > quality assurance, etc.
> > 
> > The Debian project acknowledges that:
> > 
> > * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
> >   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
> > 
> > * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
> >   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
> >   opportunity to become Debian Developers.
> > 
> > The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
> > 
> > * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
> >   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
> > 
> > * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
> >   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
> > 
> > * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
> >   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
> >   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
> >   infrastructure.
> 
> I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.

Please don't go and make this more confusing for me.  As far as I
can tell this wasn't meant to be amendment yet.  He will probably
accept this or something simular as amendment replacing the
orignal text.  So at that time I could put you down as someone
that seconds that proposal.  You now basicly seem to have created
a second proposal.


Kurt



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915194802.gb14...@roeckx.be

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
> > extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
> > second-class members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid
> > giving them a name, and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not
> > another sub-kind of project members. The "no upload rights" part would
> > just be a minor technical distinction.
> 
> ... and who am I to disagree with a proposal which find consensus from
> Lucas to Ganneff, passing through Lars and Russ? :-)
> 
> Attached you can find a tentative wording of a proposal which remove the
> term "Debian Contributors", pretty similar to the version I had before
> posting (shame on me for changing that!), but maybe a bit better in that
> it doesn't the horrible "non-uploading Debian Developer". How about it?
> I don't consider this as something that changes the meaning of the
> original GR text.
> 
> I'll let the patch linger for a couple of days -- actually, I'll be away
> for most part of tomorrow -- and then I'll apply it, posting a new
> complete draft here shortly thereafter.

So I'm not considering this currently as an amendment.


Kurt


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915194009.ga14...@roeckx.be

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

[Joey Hess]

Paul Wise wrote:
> Stefano you seem to be 5 years too late with this GR, fjp's AM report
> looks like he was accepted primarily for his work on documentation and
> translations:
> 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2005/02/msg00017.html

Not really. From my original advocation of Frans:
| Basically, Frans is now one of the relatively few core d-i developers.
| I've watched him grow from a smaller contriutor to the project
| (originally he was working only on the installation manual), learn all
| the details of working with packages and d-i and now he's everywhere,
| working on lots of different parts of d-i, from working on
| network-console and the s390 port to processing installation reports and
| helping users. He's made the whole thing seem impressively effortless,
| while at the same time clearly putting a lot of work into the project.
| Frans is exactly the kind of person we need more of on this project and
| he deserves to be an official member of it.

> In addition, as cate pointed out, the constitution already allows
> DAM/FD to accept such people.

And it *has* happened. For example, Mattias Wadenstein is a
non-packaging DD. He works on CD building and mirroring. Here's his AM
report from 2004: http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2004/09/msg00033.html

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Charles Plessy]

Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:01:47PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:16:00PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian
> > archive” were removed, it would not close the possibility for the
> > people in charge to difference of status.
> 
> > Would such a change be a happy end for everybody ?
> 
> Sorry, but I really can't accept that as a simple editorial change to
> the text I've proposed.  To go that way, please check my discussion
> points in .

In case there is a doubt: my intention is not to ask Stefano if he thinks that
the proposed change is good for everybody, but it is to ask everybody who may
care, in particular the Debian application managers and front desk, if the
proposed change would be welcome…

Good night,

-- 
Charles


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915151140.gc1...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: Draft amendment: Welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian Developers with upload access

[Christoph Berg]

Re: Lucas Nussbaum 2010-09-15 <20100915141740.ga21...@xanadu.blop.info>
> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
> 
> Additionally, the Debian project acknowledges that the current practice of
> providing all Debian Developers with access to project machines, and
> unlimited upload permissions to the Debian archive, does not follow the
> principle of least privilege, and unnecessarily exposes the Debian
> infrastructure and the Debian archive.
> 
> Therefore, the Debian project invites the relevant teams to investigate
> technical methods that would permit DDs to restrict their access to Debian
> infrastructure, and their upload access to the Debian archive, when their work
> does not require it.  Those technical methods should only be aimed at reducing
> Debian's attack surface, not at limiting DDs' access and upload permissions,
> and DDs should be able to regain unlimited access when their work require it
> without going through a review of their skills.

This looks overly detailed and too technical. This kind of security
hardening should be done independently from the non-packaging
contributors idea, if the involved parties (DSA, etc.) feel it is
necessaary. Please don't include it in a GR, but propose a text that
just says "non-packaging DDs are just like normal DDs".

Christoph
-- 
c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

What exactly is this GR supposed to do?

[Bernhard R. Link]

My main problem with this text is that while it may fit to the current
realities, it makes no sense from a formalistic point of view, as large
parts of the text seem to imply there was no way for non-packagers yet
and there were no procedures for that.

* Stefano Zacchiroli  [100915 14:00]:
> The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
> To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
> including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
> infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
> fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
> quality assurance, etc.
>
> The Debian project acknowledges that:
>
> * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
>   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
>
> * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
>   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
>   opportunity to become Debian Developers.

How about "deserve an easier opportunity to become Debian Developers
than they currently have"?

> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
>
> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
>   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.

How about

  * Endorse the idea of Debian Developers without upload access to the
Debian archive, to reduce perceived barriers hindering
non-packagers.

> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.

Trying to reword this I must say that I do not know what it is supposed
to say. Does it mean DAM should think again which parts of NM are not
needed when one does not want upload access?

> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
>   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
>   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
>   infrastructure.

Does this imply a DD without direct upload access also does not have
access to the infrastructure?

Bernhard R. Link


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100915144542.ga22...@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de

Draft amendment: Welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian Developers with upload access

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 14/09/10 at 18:56 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> While I support welcoming non-packaging contributors as project members,
> I am concerned that we are creating the concept of second-class DDs (or
> at least, that it will be communicated like that).
> 
> I see two different ways to avoid that:
> 
> [A] Avoid giving DDs without upload rights any special name or title
> (like "Debian Contributors"). Their official title should be "Debian
> Developers", and they should only be special-cased in the documents
> where the distinction between DDs with upload rights and DDs without
> upload rights is important.

So, this is achieved by Stefano's new proposal, which is great news.

> [B] Give everybody upload rights anyway. If we trust them to influence
> the project's decisions through voting, we should probably trust them to
> do the right thing and not upload packages when they don't feel
> qualified to. After all, I am a DD, I have the technical power to make
> changes to eglibc and upload it, but I should probably not do that. Why
> am I treated differently from DCs in that regard?
> Of course, we have a problem with security, and it's probably not very
> reasonable to have 1000 DDs able to upload every package, and connect to
> every project machine. So I think that we could use this GR to ask DSA,
> DAM and keyring-maint to investigate changes to the Debian
> infrastructure that would mitigate security issues in the case of a
> compromise of a DD's credentials.  Examples, just to illustrate what I'm
> thinking about:
> - create a "limited upload rights mode", where DDs would only be allowed
>   to upload their own packages. Action from the DD, like a login on
>   db.debian.org, would be required to switch to "full upload rights
>   mode", and that mode would auto-expire after a month without any
>   upload.
> - do something similar for access to project machines.

I took some time to draft an amendment along those lines.
<-
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
quality assurance, etc.

The Debian project acknowledges that:

* To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
  other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.

* Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
  and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
  opportunity to become Debian Developers.

The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:

* Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
  Debian Developers.

* Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
  non-packaging work as Debian Developers.

Additionally, the Debian project acknowledges that the current practice of
providing all Debian Developers with access to project machines, and
unlimited upload permissions to the Debian archive, does not follow the
principle of least privilege, and unnecessarily exposes the Debian
infrastructure and the Debian archive.

Therefore, the Debian project invites the relevant teams to investigate
technical methods that would permit DDs to restrict their access to Debian
infrastructure, and their upload access to the Debian archive, when their work
does not require it.  Those technical methods should only be aimed at reducing
Debian's attack surface, not at limiting DDs' access and upload permissions,
and DDs should be able to regain unlimited access when their work require it
without going through a review of their skills.
->
diff with zack's most recent proposal at the end of my mail.

Before pushing it forward as an amendment, I'd like to hear opinions about
this: we have had problems with GRs proposing orthogonal options in the past.
This amendment proposal discusses two things that are orthogonal (giving full
upload access to non-packaging contributors, and limiting every DDs' access on
a volunteer basis). Should the second part of the amendment (after
"Additionally, ..") be dropped for now? Or should we move forward as is?

 - Lucas

--- debian-contributors.txt 2010-09-15 15:21:44.734619147 +0200
+++ debian-contributors-amendment.txt   2010-09-15 16:16:19.294612170 +0200
@@ -17,12 +17,21 @@
 The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
 
 * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
-  Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
+  Debian Developers.
 
 * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
 
-* Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
-  non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

[Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt]

Hi,

Stefano Zacchiroli  writes:
> ---
> The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
> To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
> including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
> infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
> fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
> quality assurance, etc.
>
> The Debian project acknowledges that:
>
> * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
>   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
>
> * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
>   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
>   opportunity for becoming Debian project members.
>
> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
>
> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
>   Debian Developers without upload rights to the Debian archive. These
>   new developers shall be recognized as Debian Contributors (DC).
>
> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept Debian Contributors.
>
> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable Debian
>   Contributors to participate in Debian decision making and to access
>   Debian infrastructure.
> ---

Seconded. Thanks for finally pushing this to a GR.

Marc
-- 
BOFH #429:
Temporal anomaly


pgph5tGMdtUjV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Enrico Zini]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:40:56PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

> So, you say that both old and newer DDs sometimes lack packaging skills.
> This sounds like an acknowledgement of the failure of T&S, and the NM
> process in general, to make sure that DDs have the necessary skills?

Please, as requested at the start of the thread, let's stick to the
point of this specific GR and not turn this into a broad discussion
about NM.

I appreciate you have lots of strong opinions about the NM process,
although your understanding of it as has become nowadays might not be
fully up to date. If you feel compelled to start a broad discussion
about NM now, please feel free to do so on debian-newma...@l.d.o.


Ciao,

Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Stefano Zacchiroli]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:16:00PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian
> archive” were removed, it would not close the possibility for the
> people in charge to difference of status.

> Would such a change be a happy end for everybody ?

Sorry, but I really can't accept that as a simple editorial change to
the text I've proposed.  To go that way, please check my discussion
points in .

Cheers.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, |  .  |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Caposella ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 15/09/10 at 21:00 +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Attached you can find a tentative wording of a proposal which remove the
> term "Debian Contributors", pretty similar to the version I had before
> posting (shame on me for changing that!), but maybe a bit better in that
> it doesn't the horrible "non-uploading Debian Developer". How about it?
> I don't consider this as something that changes the meaning of the
> original GR text.

Much better, thanks a lot!

I'm wondering whether we should write in stone (= in the GR) that people
should not try to come up with a sexy name for DDs without upload access
to the Debian archive. This discussion might be enough.

 - Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915121609.ga18...@xanadu.blop.info

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 15/09/10 at 10:22 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> I, using my FTPMaster hat, do care a lot that we do not get
> $whateveritsname with upload rights that never ever had to show at least
> the basic understanding of packaging work. Looking at all the errors
> existing Developers do, even longstanding ones, having something like
> T&S drop away entirely will be near death. Whoever thinks "it cant be
> that bad" should do a month of release team, qa or ftpteam work. You
> will think different.

So, you say that both old and newer DDs sometimes lack packaging skills.
This sounds like an acknowledgement of the failure of T&S, and the NM
process in general, to make sure that DDs have the necessary skills?

What makes you think that completely dropping T&S would make things
significantly worse?

I'm more and more convinced that what Debian lacks is not a more
difficult NM process, but:
- a culture of asking for help, advice, and reviews
- work on our tools and processes to make them easier and less
  error-prone to use
- work on our documentations to document the best practices

After someone has done enough work inside Debian to earn the trust from
other DDs to do the right thing when participating in the project
decision making processes, I really don't see why we shouldn't also
trust him about taking the necessary steps when uploading packages, even
if he earned the trust of fellow DDs by doing non-packaging work, or
even non-technical work.

- Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915124056.gb18...@xanadu.blop.info

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

[Kumar Appaiah]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:20:54PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
> > >   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
> > >   opportunity for becoming Debian project members.
> > 
> > to become
> > or if you prefer:
> > of becoming
> 
> I bow to the superior knowledge of the British language :-) (and I
> encourage anyone to point out similar fixes).
> 
> I hereby accept this as an editorial change that does not affect the
> meaning of the proposal.
> 
> GR text is now also available at http://git.debian.org/?p=dpl/dpl.git

In a similar vein, I propose a few changes (which add cosmetic fixes,
and to my best knowledge, do not alter the meaning in any way). I
attach my patch inline, as well as separately, to be sure at least one
of them works!

Thanks.

Kumar

From c6397c766cd298d7cd361910d35ece7046e5bb1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kumar Appaiah 
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 22:27:17 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Add punctuation and fix some pronouns.

---
 gr/debian-contributors.txt |8 
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gr/debian-contributors.txt b/gr/debian-contributors.txt
index 11e9192..0bb4e73 100644
--- a/gr/debian-contributors.txt
+++ b/gr/debian-contributors.txt
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
-To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
-including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
+To that end, the project benefits from various types of contributions,
+including, but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
 infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
 fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
 quality assurance, etc.
@@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ The Debian project acknowledges that:
 * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
 
-* Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
+* Active contributors of non-packaging work, who share Debian values
   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
   opportunity to become Debian project members.
 
-The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
+The Debian project, therefore, invites the Debian Account Managers to:
 
 * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
   Debian Developers without upload rights to the Debian archive. These
-- 
1.7.1
From c6397c766cd298d7cd361910d35ece7046e5bb1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kumar Appaiah 
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 22:27:17 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Add punctuation and fix some pronouns.

---
 gr/debian-contributors.txt |8 
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gr/debian-contributors.txt b/gr/debian-contributors.txt
index 11e9192..0bb4e73 100644
--- a/gr/debian-contributors.txt
+++ b/gr/debian-contributors.txt
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
-To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
-including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
+To that end, the project benefits from various types of contributions,
+including, but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
 infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
 fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
 quality assurance, etc.
@@ -10,11 +10,11 @@ The Debian project acknowledges that:
 * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
 
-* Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
+* Active contributors of non-packaging work, who share Debian values
   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
   opportunity to become Debian project members.
 
-The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
+The Debian project, therefore, invites the Debian Account Managers to:
 
 * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
   Debian Developers without upload rights to the Debian archive. These
-- 
1.7.1



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Stefano Zacchiroli]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:13:12PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.

Thanks for your appreciation, but wait! :-) There are no need of seconds
for this change (unless some of the previous seconders considers it
unfaithful with respect to the meaning of the previous text; I don't).

Cheers.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, |  .  |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Caposella ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Charles Plessy]

Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> 
> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
> 
> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
>   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
> 
> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
> 
> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
>   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
>   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
>   infrastructure.

It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian archive”
were removed, it would not close the possibility for the people in charge to
restrict upload capacities of developers who do not need them (do-o-cracy),
while at the same time it would make the GR more neutral, focusing it on
acceptance of new members, without suggesting restriction and therefore
difference of status.

Would such a change be a happy end for everybody ?

Cheers,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915121600.gd30...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Simon Richter]

Hi,

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:

> The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
> To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
> including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
> infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
> fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
> quality assurance, etc.
> 
> The Debian project acknowledges that:
> 
> * To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
>   other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.
> 
> * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
>   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
>   opportunity to become Debian Developers.
> 
> The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
> 
> * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
>   Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
> 
> * Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
>   non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
> 
> * Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
>   non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
>   participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
>   infrastructure.

I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.

   Simon


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Stefano Zacchiroli]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
> extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
> second-class members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid
> giving them a name, and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not
> another sub-kind of project members. The "no upload rights" part would
> just be a minor technical distinction.

... and who am I to disagree with a proposal which find consensus from
Lucas to Ganneff, passing through Lars and Russ? :-)

Attached you can find a tentative wording of a proposal which remove the
term "Debian Contributors", pretty similar to the version I had before
posting (shame on me for changing that!), but maybe a bit better in that
it doesn't the horrible "non-uploading Debian Developer". How about it?
I don't consider this as something that changes the meaning of the
original GR text.

I'll let the patch linger for a couple of days — actually, I'll be away
for most part of tomorrow — and then I'll apply it, posting a new
complete draft here shortly thereafter.

Cheers.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, |  .  |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Caposella ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
quality assurance, etc.

The Debian project acknowledges that:

* To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
  other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.

* Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
  and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
  opportunity to become Debian Developers.

The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:

* Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
  Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.

* Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
  non-packaging work as Debian Developers.

* Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
  non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
  participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
  infrastructure.
--- debian-contributors.txt	2010-09-15 20:54:06.0 +0900
+++ /tmp/debian-contributors.txt	2010-09-15 20:54:04.507770573 +0900
@@ -12,16 +12,17 @@
 
 * Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
   and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
-  opportunity to become Debian project members.
+  opportunity to become Debian Developers.
 
 The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
 
 * Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
-  Debian Developers without upload rights to the Debian archive. These
-  new developers shall be recognized as Debian Contributors (DC).
+  Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
 
-* Establish procedures to evaluate and accept Debian Contributors.
+* Establish procedures to evaluate and accept contributors of
+  non-packaging work as Debian Developers.
 
-* Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable Debian
-  Contributors to participate in Debian decision making and to access
-  Debian infrastructure.
+* Initiate the appropriate technical measures to enable contributors of
+  non-packaging work, which get accepted as Debian Developers, to
+  participate in Debian decision making and to access Debian
+  infrastructure.
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure and website maintenance, porting, bug triaging and
fixing, management activities, communication, testing, legal advice,
quality assurance, etc.

The Debian project acknowledges that:

* To pursue Debian goals, package maintenance as well as a wide range of
  other technical and non-technical contributions are all valuable.

* Active contributors of non-packaging work, which share Debian values
  and are ready to uphold Debian Foundation Documents, deserve the
  opportunity to become Debian [-project members.-] {+Developers.+}

The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:

* Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
  Debian [-Developers-] {+Developers, albeit+} without upload [-rights-] 
{+access+} to the De

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Steve McIntyre]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
>If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
>extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into second-class
>members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
>and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not another sub-kind of
>project members. The "no upload rights" part would just be a minor
>technical distinction.
>
>Another way to put it is, imagine you are a DC, and are writing your CV.
>What should you write about your status in Debian? "Debian Contributor"?
>"Debian Developer"? If we create the "Debian Contributor" term, then I'm
>sure that for many DCs, it will be difficult to write "Debian Developer"
>there (Imposter Syndrome, etc), even if that's what should really be
>written, since their contributions to Debian are not less important than
>those of other DDs.
>
>Just leaving it up to DAM to choose a term would not be enough to avoid
>that. IMHO, DDs without upload rights should not have any sexy name, and
>the distinction between them and DDs with upload rights should only be
>made where it's necessary.

Definitely.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"C++ ate my sanity" -- Jon Rabone


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Xavier Oswald]

On 09:26 Wed 15 Sep , Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
> extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into 
> second-class
> members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
> and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not another sub-kind of
> project members. The "no upload rights" part would just be a minor
> technical distinction.

+1.

I think we should not go to some kind of discrimination about terms.
For example, people writing documentations are as importants as DDs but they
don't need so much access than a DDs should need. A project is a whole and have
members. Official members in Debian are called DD. And I think DD is a good
choice since "developer" can be used in several contexts. For me, I see more the
term "developer" as development inside and around the project.


What we could have is.

Case 1.
===

Debian Developer ---> Unlimited upload access
  |-> Documentation R/W access
  |-> FTP-Master
  |-> Release manager

Case 2.
===

Debian Developer ---> Upload access on personnal packages
  |-> Documentation R/W access 

Case N.
===

Debian Developer ---> access to ...
  |-> access to ...


I see a DD more as a project member instead of a specific member.

To attribute rights we could have procedures like we have NM process for
having Unlimited upload access. The documentation team could have some templates
and follow contributors for attributing the DD status with Documentation R/W
access. And all DD should have voting rights.

Well it's just some ideas I have in mind and wanted to tell here. Maybe Im
pushing things to far.

Greetings,
-- 
Xavier Oswald 
GNU/Linux Debian Developer - http://www.debian.org/
GPG key ID: 0x464B8DE3


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915090146.ga12...@master

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

[Charles Plessy]

Le Tue, Sep 14, 2010 mat 06:29:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Charles Plessy  writes:
> 
> > after seeing the torrent of seconds, I am still puzzled if this GR is a
> > progress or a regression: is the take home message that Debian should be
> > more open, or that some members must not have upload rights ? When a
> > member does not have upload rights, is it for the principle of least
> > needed priviledge, which suggests that getting that prividedge may be
> > granted automaticaly later with the need, or because that member is not
> > trusted to be able to upload correctly ?
> 
> Well, if one isn't interested in upload rights, there's no need for one to
> qualify on upload rights during NM, which implies omitting or at least
> much abbreviating the Tasks and Skills part of NM.  But if we want to
> maintain the policy that anyone with general upload rights complete Tasks
> and Skills for package uploads, we wouldn't want to extend those rights
> later without having the person go through NM.

I think that this is where our point of view differ the most. I think that
somebody who was accepted as a member, because he showed enough reliability in
his work, respect for our procedures and commitment in his contributions, does
not need to qualify again to start uploading packages when his contribution
eventually evolves in that direction.

We are proud to be a do-o-cracy. I think that we can let our members to
demonstrate their capacities by giving them the opportunity of doing the things
right, instead of passing certificates. If we trust somebody to manage
correctly his SSH and GPG keys and prevent from bad people stealing his
identity and loging in our machines with bad intentions, then I think that we
must trust that person to not do rogue NMUs nor upload to NEW packages that they
do not have the capacity to maintain.

More in general, I think that the principle of least priviledge is best applied
when a large majority do not need them (like driving trucks and airplanes, or
logging in some machines at the core of our infrastructure), but is not much
benefical when it is about managing a minority.

But the core of my disagreement is not about priviledge management, which
already takes place for other operations than upload, but classifying DDs
through the passage of certificates, since in my understanting a DC will be a
DD for whom it will be remembered that T&C was not passed, and who will not be
able to upload until he passes that test.

I have to say that I am also worried that this is just the beginning of a more
comprehensive categorization of the roles within Debian. The application
managers and the front desk are doing great work in managing the request to
join our project, but I object extending their role to manage the access of the
DDs to the components of our architecture.

Cheers,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915084303.ga30...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Russ Allbery]

Joerg Jaspert  writes:

> The more important part is getting the project to acknowledge the
> concept of a set of members/developers/whateveryounameit not having
> upload rights by default and letting DAM/FD/theusualpeople just manage
> that. The important part is opening our membership to people who deserve
> it, but who (most likely) never ever will maintain a package and as such
> currently have a hard time joiningm as we do want to see new people have
> at least a basic set of knowledge packaging requires (be that using a
> set of questions or by evaluating what they have in the archive, the
> procedure there is up to the AM). And the latter part should change,
> giving people who want to an early exit - consequently a little less
> ability later on, but one they dont need/want then.

This I definitely agree with and support.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwxbjtp6@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Joerg Jaspert]

> I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those sets
> of permissions that some people have and others don't.  Those who need
> that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate vetting of
> their ability to use that access appropriately, just as someone would
> volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint, or the Lintian
> maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting, be given additional
> privileges to do that work.  Having or not having additional access should
> not change the basic DD status.

I, using my DAM hat, don't care if this gets a name. It got one as it
seemed good at the time of writing, but whatever its named (or not) is
REALLY just a very tiny little bit of this thing and about as important
as the fact if someone had rice or meat for breakfast.

The more important part is getting the project to acknowledge the
concept of a set of members/developers/whateveryounameit not having
upload rights by default and letting DAM/FD/theusualpeople just manage
that. The important part is opening our membership to people who deserve
it, but who (most likely) never ever will maintain a package and as such
currently have a hard time joiningm as we do want to see new people
have at least a basic set of knowledge packaging requires (be that using
a set of questions or by evaluating what they have in the archive, the
procedure there is up to the AM). And the latter part should change,
giving people who want to an early exit - consequently a little less
ability later on, but one they dont need/want then.


I, using my FTPMaster hat, do care a lot that we do not get
$whateveritsname with upload rights that never ever had to show at least
the basic understanding of packaging work. Looking at all the errors
existing Developers do, even longstanding ones, having something like
T&S drop away entirely will be near death. Whoever thinks "it cant be
that bad" should do a month of release team, qa or ftpteam work. You
will think different.


-- 
bye, Joerg
Naturally; worms that don't know what they are doing end up as
fish bait, instead of getting invited into weird math experiments.
-- Lars Wirzenius


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwxbquvo@gkar.ganneff.de

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs

[Russ Allbery]

Lucas Nussbaum  writes:

> If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
> extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
> second-class members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving
> them a name, and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not another
> sub-kind of project members. The "no upload rights" part would just be a
> minor technical distinction.

I wholeheartedly second this.

I'm one of the people who has previously argued for giving different sets
of privileges different names, but after reviewing this thread, I think I
was wrong.  I don't think we should so that at all.

DDs already have widely varying privileges.  We have different levels of
commit access to various project repositories.  Some of us have logins on
some systems that others do not.  I have sudo access to lintian, for
example, which most other DDs do not.  Some are DSA members and have root
access to many project systems.  Some are ftp-master team members and have
more direct access to the project archive.  There are numerous other
examples.  Yet we're all currently called DDs.

I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those sets
of permissions that some people have and others don't.  Those who need
that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate vetting of
their ability to use that access appropriately, just as someone would
volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint, or the Lintian
maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting, be given additional
privileges to do that work.  Having or not having additional access should
not change the basic DD status.

In fact, we should all be striving to follow the principle of least
privilege and *not* have access that we don't need and don't use, since
unused access is one of the primary vulnerabilities to any sort of
organizational security.  In the long run, I'd love to see a mechanism
whereby someone who was qualified for unlimited upload access but doesn't
need it for their current work in Debian could have it turned off, to
reduce Debian's attack surface, and then regain it later if the nature of
their work in Debian changes.

Similarly, along that same vein, could we stop calling it "upload rights"
and instead call it "upload access"?  "Rights" has connotations (at least
to this US English speaker) of citizenship, fundamental rights, and
similar ideas, which lead directly to the conception of someone without a
"right" as a second-class citizen of Debian.  I would much rather think of
it as access, just like sudo to a user, membership in some project group,
or commit access to some repository is an access control.  It's a security
and project safety measure following both best practices for access
control and a system of qualification to do something with direct impact
on other people's work (just like qualification for a driver's license is
required since one's operation of a car has a direct impact on other
people's use of their cars).  Someone without a "right" is someone we
think less of; someone without "access" is someone who doesn't need it or
who hasn't yet finished the qualification process for it.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pqwfjvz5@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Lars Wirzenius]

On ke, 2010-09-15 at 09:26 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
> extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into 
> second-class
> members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
> and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not another sub-kind of
> project members. The "no upload rights" part would just be a minor
> technical distinction.
> 
> Another way to put it is, imagine you are a DC, and are writing your CV.
> What should you write about your status in Debian? "Debian Contributor"?
> "Debian Developer"? If we create the "Debian Contributor" term, then I'm
> sure that for many DCs, it will be difficult to write "Debian Developer"
> there (Imposter Syndrome, etc), even if that's what should really be
> written, since their contributions to Debian are not less important than
> those of other DDs.
> 
> Just leaving it up to DAM to choose a term would not be enough to avoid
> that. IMHO, DDs without upload rights should not have any sexy name, and
> the distinction between them and DDs with upload rights should only be
> made where it's necessary.
> 
> I don't think that the IRC conversation example you gave is a convincing
> one. It wouldn't hurt much to write "I'm a DD without upload rights"
> instead of "I'm a Debian Contributor" (it's only 6 characters more!).

I fully agree with Lucas.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1284536165.2573.54.ca...@havelock

Naming of non-uploading DDs (Was: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members)

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 15/09/10 at 12:08 +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Naming  (raised by at least Luca and Lars [8,9])
> ==
> 
> Ah, what a mess!
> 
> Until a few minutes before posting the GR proposal, the text contained a
> s/Debian Members/non-uploading Debian Developers/ and before that
> several more s/// have been applied on drafts. So, believe me, I fully
> understand the puzzling about the name.
> 
> Let's make it clear that the "new role" we are introducing is not
> something different than DDs from the POV of constitution. We are just
> saying that we accept as DDs (called in the constitution both
> "developers" and "project members") people who contribute stuff other
> than packaging work. Those people will be "Debian Developer", no
> question. The problem is that in practice we will *need* a name to
> distinguish on the basis of upload rights (e.g. imagine an IRC
> conversation on the topic of "can you sponsor this upload of
> mine?"). Either we propose a name while introducing the concept, or it
> will be chosen by folklore and I don't believe that would be wise.
> 
> In principle, nothing stops us from leaving the name out of the GR and
> leave up to DAM to select one, as suggested by Luca [8]. The advantage
> of that is we will not tie our hands with a specific name. The drawback
> is that, will start to talk about the new role anyhow, without waiting
> for a proper name blessing. Considering all of the above, I thought that
> going for "Debian Contributor" was the better solution.
> 
> If there is consensus in leaving the name out of the GR, I can apply
> back the above substitution. I consider that as something that "do not
> alter the meaning" of the GR and is hence something I can do without
> much disruption.

If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into second-class
members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
and emphasize the fact that they are DDs, not another sub-kind of
project members. The "no upload rights" part would just be a minor
technical distinction.

Another way to put it is, imagine you are a DC, and are writing your CV.
What should you write about your status in Debian? "Debian Contributor"?
"Debian Developer"? If we create the "Debian Contributor" term, then I'm
sure that for many DCs, it will be difficult to write "Debian Developer"
there (Imposter Syndrome, etc), even if that's what should really be
written, since their contributions to Debian are not less important than
those of other DDs.

Just leaving it up to DAM to choose a term would not be enough to avoid
that. IMHO, DDs without upload rights should not have any sexy name, and
the distinction between them and DDs with upload rights should only be
made where it's necessary.

I don't think that the IRC conversation example you gave is a convincing
one. It wouldn't hurt much to write "I'm a DD without upload rights"
instead of "I'm a Debian Contributor" (it's only 6 characters more!).

 - Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915072659.ga11...@xanadu.blop.info