Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 09:20:00PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 03:46:50PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote: On Thu Jun 25 13:23, Mark Brown wrote: I stopped being an AM largely as a result of the introduction of the templated questions. I felt that all I was doing was shooting enormous I didn't think that using the templates was required for AMs, merely a useful tool. I think AMs should be able to check to their satisfaction in other ways as appropriate, as long as it produces a similar result In theory. In practice that wasn't the impression that was given; the impression that was given was that they really really should be used. Even if I had carried on it was uncomfortable knowing that there presence or absence of the templates varied. In practice, I (with my not that often used FD hat on) will accept an AM report that is a result of a non-templated process, provided that the AM was thorough in their requests. If 'not using the templates' is just an excuse for I think there's just way too much stuff in the templates, and I want to get this over with, with as little effort as possible, then I will not accept it. However, if the mailbox convinces me that the AM did indeed thorougly check the skills and knowledge of the NM, in about as thorough a manner as would be done through use of the templates (or better, which is hardly difficult), then I personally do not object to people ignoring the templates; on the contrary. I don't have any reason to think the DAM's idea of this is different, but I could of course be mistaken. (you are happy that the candidate _does_ know all those things and will probably get them right in practice). Personally I think it's far more interesting to try to get an idea of how they'll handle things if they're working on something they've not looked at before and how they'll handle things when stuff doesn't go according to plan. The big lists of questions kind of work against this. That is most certainly true; the big list of questions is mostly an attempt at trying to cover as much as possible, so anyone (even those who clearly know their stuff) are tested thoroughly. Personalizing the process by asking little questions about things the applicant is clearly an expert on, but asking more and doing more mentoring on areas the applicant is not an expert on, is certainly welcome. I definitely would like to see more people doing so. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Friday 17 July 2009, Mark Brown wrote: Right, it appears to be trying to make sure that someone might possibly run into in Debian has been covered. Like I say, this is a large part of my problem with it at this point - I don't think that is an achievable or useful goal and it does lock out people like translators (though that's more of a theoretical concern than a practical one). That last is simply not true. If someone wants to enter the project as translator or documentation writer or whatever, the AM has the option of simply skipping any parts of the NM process that are not relevant for that task and adding other TS tasks that test skills relevant to that role. For example, during my NM process I was never asked to do any of the TS parts dealing with e.g. library packaging because it was understood that I was just not interested in doing that. My AM, FD and DAM had faith that I would not attempt things outside my area of interest and skills, so I was accepted into the project without being able to package a library. I have of course extended my skills over time, but as I'm still completely uninterested in library packaging and have never come close to doing it, it looks like that was a good call. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 03:02:52PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: On Friday 17 July 2009, Mark Brown wrote: achievable or useful goal and it does lock out people like translators (though that's more of a theoretical concern than a practical one). That last is simply not true. If someone wants to enter the project as translator or documentation writer or whatever, the AM has the option of simply skipping any parts of the NM process that are not relevant for that task and adding other TS tasks that test skills relevant to that role. I know that was the original theory. However, if we're asking packagers a big list of questions which attempt to cover every possible aspect of development it seems at best uneven to skip that for non-packagers. Clearly the TS questions aren't going to be terribly appropriate for someone working on non-packaging tasks but one could equally make the argument that if someone's working on packaging particular kinds of package then those TS questions that cover other areas of packaging aren't relevant to them. That said... For example, during my NM process I was never asked to do any of the TS parts dealing with e.g. library packaging because it was understood that I was just not interested in doing that. My AM, FD and DAM had faith that I would not attempt things outside my area of interest and skills, so I was accepted into the project without being able to package a library. ...it seems that an approach which does skip some of the templates is being accepted, which is good. I'm guessing that some of the AMs might not have realised this, at least in the past - I know when I saw people saying to use the templates I didn't get the impression that this was the idea, especially given the coverage goal. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
