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

[Faidon Liambotis]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

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 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.

Still worried about terminology, but this is too important to hold it
off for such details.

Regards,
Faidon


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkyPqPgACgkQVty5d8XpUzNJ4ACeJMNLMmsMr5gUbFrAe09cVQAN
Nu8AnjqKvg54o3ukn0zy+vwy84t0JldG
=6PI+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/4c8fa8fc.8010...@debian.org

Re: Results for General Resolution: Lenny and resolving DFSG violations

[Faidon Liambotis]

Anthony Towns wrote:
> Anyway, despite something kinda close to advocacy for the FD option in
> the second call for votes on d-d-a, FD lost convincingly to most of the
> options on offer. So of any conclusions you might draw, the simplest,
> safest and most easily justified seems to be "stop discussing this and
> release lenny"...
I've heard this before and I'm not sure I understand it.

Lenny is _not_ in a releaseable state.
We have enough RC bugs that it will take a while to be able to release.

How's the discussion hurting the release at the moment?

Unless you are suggesting that people discuss _instead of_ fixing RC
bugs, to which I'm not sure I agree.

Personally, I'm fine with the in depth discussion and with the voting as
long as it's not a blocker for the release.

That's not to say that I'm not getting tired of discussing the same
thing again and again; I firmly believe that we should have one or more
sane and clear GR(s), with no "for this release/time period only"
options and end this matter once and for all.

Regards,
Faidon


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org