On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:02:57AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:55:55PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
Given how rooted is the acronym DD in the Debian community, I doubt it
is a good idea to change it or even to get rid of it.
True, but the proposal splits the
On Thursday 2008-10-23, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I hate in Ganneff proposal the fact that it just standardize the 6
months delay to be a DD. It's acknowledging that we suck, and trying
nothing to fix the problem. It's unacceptable to me.
I read that as requiring a long-term involvement in Debian
On Friday 2008-10-24, Bas Wijnen wrote:
Calling every member a DD (as it is now) would need a new meaning for
DD, because as I wrote, not every member is a developer. If you have a
suggestion for a better name, I'm open for suggestions. I couldn't come
up with anything better than member,
Hi Ganeff,
Just a note to register my endorsement that I believe you have great
ideas here.
Cheers,
Andrew McMillan
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 23:33 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
Summary of this post
I do not like the way Joerg wants to change the way people become and
are members of the Debian project. It's not all bad, but on the whole it
makes some of the worst parts of Debian become worse. It concentrates
power into fewer hands, removes some of the benefits of the Debian
Maintainer
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg nominated teams, not persons.
My and the people involved should be read as
and the number of teams involved.
I don't think nominated is the correct term here. Joerg did
not nominate the secretary for
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The other end of the membership process is screwed up too. We should not
have to actively seek out members who are Missing In Action. Staying a
member in Debian should be an active process: if you don't do anything,
you
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:44:03AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I do not like the way Joerg wants to change the way people become and
are members of the Debian project. It's not all bad, but on the whole it
makes some of the worst parts of Debian become worse. It concentrates
power into
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
*
The keyrings shall be maintained in a way that
allows any member to change them,
Since you refused to explain on IRC, please explain the rationale and
use-cases here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Hi,
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
* Membership is controlled via GnuPG keyrings, primarily maintained by the
Debian Account Manager. The keyrings shall be maintained in a way that
allows any member to change them, and that is fully transparent to the
members in general, and that further makes
also sprach Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.10.24.1044 +0200]:
* Membership is controlled via GnuPG keyrings, primarily maintained by the
Debian Account Manager. The keyrings shall be maintained in a way that
allows any member to change them, and that is fully transparent to the
On Friday 2008-10-24, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
* Membership is controlled via GnuPG keyrings, primarily maintained by
the Debian Account Manager. The keyrings shall be maintained in a way
that allows any member to change them, and that is fully transparent to
the
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 01:35:43PM +0200, cobaco wrote:
AIUI he's just advocating having the equivalent of a (publicly scrutinized)
NMU for the keyring, that is:
- have trusted gatekeeper(s) who normally does all changes
- have all changes be public (many eyes make all bugs shallow)
-
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
I start loving more this proposal.
Debian is about developing a free operating system, but there's more
in an operating system than just software and packages. If we want
translators, documentation writers, artists, free software
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
I start loving more this proposal.
Debian is about developing a free operating system, but there's more
in an operating system than just software and packages. If we want
translators, documentation
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 02:12:27PM +0200, Michael Hanke wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 01:49:48PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 01:35:43PM +0200, cobaco wrote:
AIUI he's just advocating having the equivalent of a (publicly
scrutinized)
NMU for the
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 11:42 +0200, Michael Hanke kirjoitti:
What does this mean? It automatically ends after a vote or two years?
Or
is it rather (semi)automatically extended by continued contributions of a yet
to be defined type (e.g. package uploads, bug reports/fixes)?
You become a member,
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 12:18 +0200, Peter Palfrader kirjoitti:
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
*
The keyrings shall be maintained in a way that
allows any member to change them,
Since you refused to explain on IRC, please explain the rationale and
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 13:36 +0200, martin f krafft kirjoitti:
also sprach Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.10.24.1044 +0200]:
* Membership is controlled via GnuPG keyrings, primarily maintained by the
Debian Account Manager. The keyrings shall be maintained in a way that
allows any
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:31:36PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
So its IMHO not really a good idea to give power to people,
who _do not need_ the power.
Why not? Is this the same reason it's not a good idea to let people
have liquids on airplanes?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
With the upload of debian-maintainers version 1.47, the following
changes to the keyring have been made:
dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full name: Mehdi Dogguy
Added key: 521B0E56C8AD98A189B9C56886BCABFF1C00C790
dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full name: Olly Betts
Added key:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 03:50:28PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 11:42 +0200, Michael Hanke kirjoitti:
What does this mean? It automatically ends after a vote or two
years? Or is it rather (semi)automatically extended by continued
contributions of a yet to be defined
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
I start loving more this proposal.
Debian is about developing a free operating system, but there's more
in an operating system than just software and packages. If we want
translators,
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:32:34AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 23 octobre 2008 à 10:20 +0200, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
It is
- a start of the discussion, using d-d-a on purpose to reach
everyone in something that more or less touches all of us, and
- a new policy to get
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're going to do this, there should also be another way than
voting for people to reset their timer. I wouldn't want to see people
having to propose a null vote because they didn't care for any official
votes during the last two years and now find
also sprach Clint Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.10.24.1502 +0200]:
Why not? Is this the same reason it's not a good idea to let
people have liquids on airplanes?
No, for the same reasons that you exit a root shell when you are
done with whatever required you to open one, or that you don't
Le vendredi 24 octobre 2008 à 15:17 +0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:32:34AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
We have a process for this kind of changes, it’s call DEPs. Why didn’t
you start this discussion as a DEP instead?
Because Debian is not Python? AFAIK
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 03:23:34PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
No, for the same reasons that you exit a root shell when you are
done with whatever required you to open one, or that you don't stand
in the middle of a road while reading the map. Come on, Clint!
Those are decisions I make
Le vendredi 24 octobre 2008 à 13:49 +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld a écrit :
and where is the difference? Still, every DD would be able to kick out
every other DD of the keyring. Obvious the only protection against abuse
is that it should be public.
Every DD is already able to upload a package that
also sprach Clint Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.10.24.1528 +0200]:
No, for the same reasons that you exit a root shell when you are
done with whatever required you to open one, or that you don't stand
in the middle of a road while reading the map. Come on, Clint!
Those are decisions I
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
To cite an extreme example, Ingo Juergensman doesn't do packaging
nor anything of the above. Nevertheless, he's an active member of
the Debian community for many years (even despite severe problems)
by supporting the m68k port with hosts and maintenance. He should
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:33:12PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
How long has it been discussed?
From: Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Developer status
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:50:36 +0200
--
Lo-lan-do Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
To cite an extreme example, Ingo Juergensman doesn't do packaging
nor anything of the above. Nevertheless, he's an active member of
the Debian community for many years (even despite severe problems)
by supporting the m68k port with hosts and
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 04:18:04PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're going to do this, there should also be another way than
voting for people to reset their timer. I wouldn't want to see people
having to propose a null vote because they didn't
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Having hundreds of (potentially unsafe) keys with upload rights to
our archive, which isn't actually needed in many many cases is one
thing; allowing all these keys to approve or delete members is
another.
Since any changes need to be easy to undo, and we need
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 03:25:57PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 24 octobre 2008 à 15:17 +0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:32:34AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
We have a process for this kind of changes, it’s call DEPs. Why didn’t
you start this
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 04:30:31PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
To cite an extreme example, Ingo Juergensman doesn't do packaging
nor anything of the above. Nevertheless, he's an active member of
the Debian community for many years (even
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 08:44:03AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I do not like the way Joerg wants to change the way people become and
are members of the Debian project. It's not all bad, but on the whole it
makes some of the worst parts of Debian become worse. It concentrates
power into fewer
On 11547 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
The NEW queue hasn't been processed for two months if we except a few
fast-tracked packages, and the number of packages it contains has
increased a lot.
This is not entirely true.
Yes, it has been processed way less often than in the past and has
Le vendredi 24 octobre 2008 à 11:44 +0300, Lars Wirzenius a écrit :
I think we should go in the opposite direction: massively simplify
the whole membership thing.
In a single word: yes. We need something simple and efficient. I agree
with pretty much everything you propose, although I think
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I think we should go in the opposite direction: massively simplify
the whole membership thing.
[...]
I do not believe the current New Maintainer process measures those
things in a practical way. I wish to suggest a replacement process.
I like
Le vendredi 24 octobre 2008 à 17:59 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
Concrete proposal: max(Q, 20) endorsements, two existing members
together can veto. The veto can be done anonymously via the Debian
Account Manager to avoid peer pressure to not veto. The DAM only
counts the
On Fri Oct 24 11:44, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I do not like the way Joerg wants to change the way people become and
are members of the Debian project. It's not all bad, but on the whole it
makes some of the worst parts of Debian become worse. It concentrates
power into fewer hands, removes some
On Fri,24.Oct.08, 14:31:42, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
contributor.debian.org mail
---
We are considering to implement an @contributor.debian.org mail
forwarding setup which would be open for DC/DM too. Such addresses would
continue to be valid even after a person
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:44:03AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
[snip]
Proposal
* People should be allowed to join Debian when there is reasonably
wide-spread consensus that they agree with the project's goals, are
committed to working on those goals, and are trustworthy. The
Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Fri,24.Oct.08, 14:31:42, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
contributor.debian.org mail
---
We are considering to implement an @contributor.debian.org mail
forwarding setup which would be open for DC/DM too. Such addresses would
continue to be
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I think we should go in the opposite direction: massively simplify
the whole membership thing.
I tend to agree on the description of the situation but I would also add
that we effectively have a trust problem within the project and that any
reform to
Hi Lars,
Thank you a lot for taking the time in drawing this nice proposal.
I like it in overall, but with some little changes, that have been already
covered in previous emails. Still I am commenting them.
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:44:03AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
[...]
I think we
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:36:02PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Non-packaging contributors were always supported in the current NM
process - this issue was discussed at the time the process was created
Sorry, but that's not
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 05:49:25PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
New assistants - well. I called for help some time ago. Got *very few*
replies of which even less matched the expectations (in terms of what
they volunteer for, limiting yourself to just one kind of work wasn't
(and isn't) what we
2008/10/24 Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think we should go in the opposite direction: massively simplify
the whole membership thing.
I support your proposal. I'm very much along those lines of thinking.
As others have said, some things have to be polished, but I like it
very much on
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 05:49:25PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
What you saw is most probably a change in the code behind NEW which,
since some time, gives precedence to packages that only add new binary
components to the archive, not full source uploads. The idea being that
those need way
Ana Guerrero a écrit :
Hi Lars,
Thank you a lot for taking the time in drawing this nice proposal.
I like it in overall, but with some little changes, that have been already
covered in previous emails. Still I am commenting them.
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:44:03AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I really like the idea of:
- activity = you keep your membership
- inactivity = you lose your membership
Maybe we could find another way to define activity, like (upload || vote
|| svn commit || ...), which retrigger some time of memberships.
Or a simple
Didier Raboud a écrit :
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I really like the idea of:
- activity = you keep your membership
- inactivity = you lose your membership
Maybe we could find another way to define activity, like (upload || vote
|| svn commit || ...), which retrigger some time of memberships.
What you saw is most probably a change in the code behind NEW which,
since some time, gives precedence to packages that only add new binary
components to the archive, not full source uploads. The idea being that
those need way less time to process, which usually works pretty well.
I am
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Ana Guerrero a écrit :
[...]
* Membership ends 24 months after they're given, or after the latest
participation in a vote arranged by the project's Secretary. Members
may retire themselves earlier, of course.
No, please, voting should be voluntary.
On one side
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:42:34AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
What you saw is most probably a change in the code behind NEW which,
since some time, gives precedence to packages that only add new binary
components to the archive, not full source uploads. The idea being that
those need
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 01:43:31PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Luk Claes wrote:
Raphael Geissert wrote:
What about getting every maintainer's key in a keyring and LDAP? it would
finally allow for a better management system to take place
The problem is that
Hi Luk,
2008/10/23 Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Raphael Geissert wrote:
Right, but do the members of the NMC cover the wide variety of
programming languages?
or what kind of review are they going to do? just packaging stuff? if
it is just the latter it would be much easier and faster to
Hello,
I have read the posts about this long awaited subject discussion.
(please, forgive my poor english, and ask for details)
Interesting ideas to register, already posted by others:
- Simplify things.
* There are too much overloaded people already. Teams should be
emphasized.
* There are
On Fri, Oct 24 2008, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
The number of teams increment the bureaucracy (changing
the proposal, coordination), and doesn't fit the Debian
structure (role [proposers] vs. hierarchical [proposal]).
On Fri, Oct 24 2008, Michael Hanke wrote:
The keyring does not have to be exposed directly. It could work via a
delaying queue or stanging area. Changes commited to be applied to the
keyring could be made publicly available for peer-review. This would
make it possible that any change could
On Fri, Oct 24 2008, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I believe, very strongly, that the important distinction between someone
who is a member of Debian and someone who is not is that the member may
vote in Debian matters.
Further, I do believe that being able to upload packages is another very
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 16:56 +0200, Wouter Verhelst kirjoitti:
If you insist. Note that I'll vote against it -- I've never liked
procedures whose sole purpose is to change procedures.
For what it's worth, as one of the three people who suggested DEP in the
first place, I would be unhappy to see
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 22:51 -0500, Manoj Srivastava kirjoitti:
* Members may be expelled via the normal General Resolution process,
with
a simple majority. Ftpmasters may temporarily limit upload rights in an
emergency.
So expulsion by DAM's is a power you are proposing to
pe, 2008-10-24 kello 22:56 -0500, Manoj Srivastava kirjoitti:
The keyring does not have to be exposed directly. It could work via a
delaying queue or stanging area. Changes commited to be applied to the
keyring could be made publicly available for peer-review. This would
make it possible
67 matches
Mail list logo
