Russ Allbery writes:
> Ben Finney writes:
> > It seems to me that the Debian Maintainer role is clearly focussed
> > on granting the minimum needed to be a maintainer within the Debian
> > project, as opposed to a maintainer not within the Debian project.
> > So I don't see your case for wanting
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 07:21:08PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> Zack, are you going to coordinate this with your DPL hat? If there's
> need for some "dumb" manpower, I'd be happy to help.
Nope, not really: as you observe I think the NM frontdesk, and maybe
more generally the NM committee (hey,
Felipe Sateler writes:
> On 05/07/10 20:25, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> So that they can upload a Debian package. They may have no intention
>> to become the maintainer. I see a real layer of additional distinction
>> from people who upload packages to people who are maintainers. The
>> latter is a
On 05/07/10 20:25, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> >> and not all Debian Maintainers are maintainers
>> > That last one is new to me. What's the point of becoming a Debian
>> > Maintainer if not to maintain one or more packages in Debian?
> So that they can upload a Debian package. They may have no intent
Ben Finney writes:
> So:
> * Package Maintainer can be anyone
> * Debian Maintainer can do anything the above can do, but is also a
> member of the Debian project (i.e. “a Package Maintainer within the
> Debian project”)
That would be a fine set of terminology if we had a role like that, b
Russ Allbery writes:
> Ben Finney writes:
> > Russ Allbery writes:
>
> >> And in the process, PLEASE rename Debian Maintainer to something
> >> that isn't completely confusing given the existence of a Maintainer
> >> field in all of our packages
>
> > Isn't the very point of the Debian Maintain
Bernd Zeimetz writes:
> On 07/06/2010 12:04 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> > As a Debian Maintainer, a significant power I *don't* have is that
> > of uploading (arbitrary) packages. So no, that would not be a good
> > change of terminology.
>
> Also Debian Developers are able to upload stuff, therefore
On 07/05/2010 11:12 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Christoph Berg writes:
>> Re: Steve Langasek 2010-07-05 <20100705164805.ga26...@dario.dodds.net>
>
>>> I haven't seen anyone propose a good name that it can be changed *to*.
>>> Shouldn't that be the first step?
>
>> It would probably be "New Develo
Ben Finney writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> And in the process, PLEASE rename Debian Maintainer to something that
>> isn't completely confusing given the existence of a Maintainer field
>> in all of our packages
> Isn't the very point of the Debian Maintainer role that it more
> precisely does
On 07/06/2010 12:04 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Holger Levsen writes:
>
>> rename "Debian maintainers" to "Debian uploaders"?
>
> As a Debian Maintainer, a significant power I *don't* have is that of
> uploading (arbitrary) packages. So no, that would not be a good change
> of terminology.
Also De
Russ Allbery writes:
> And in the process, PLEASE rename Debian Maintainer to something that
> isn't completely confusing given the existence of a Maintainer field
> in all of our packages
Isn't the very point of the Debian Maintainer role that it more
precisely does meet the definition of the r
Holger Levsen writes:
> rename "Debian maintainers" to "Debian uploaders"?
As a Debian Maintainer, a significant power I *don't* have is that of
uploading (arbitrary) packages. So no, that would not be a good change
of terminology.
--
\ “We jealously reserve the right to be mistaken in
Christoph Berg writes:
> Re: Steve Langasek 2010-07-05 <20100705164805.ga26...@dario.dodds.net>
>> I haven't seen anyone propose a good name that it can be changed *to*.
>> Shouldn't that be the first step?
> It would probably be "New Developer". But before everyone rushes to
> update lots of d
I understand that any one who has an advocate can become a Debian
Maintainer.
So the Debian Maintainer as it is today could become a Debian
Contributor. Without any modification.
Everything relies on the advocation.
I have created http://wiki.debian.org/Maintainers/Discussion to have a
bett
Jan Dittberner writes:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Ludovico Cavedon wrote:
> > On 07/02/2010 11:14 PM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> > >Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
> > >try to explain these to potential contributors?
> > >
> > >Can we _at least_
Re: gregor herrmann 2010-07-05 <20100705174124.gj4...@belanna.comodo.priv.at>
> _If_ the membership stuff is changed; is anybody working on this
> issue currently?
It's on top of the NM TODO list, together with the website rewrite.
(Which is a precondition.)
Christoph
--
c...@df7cb.de | http://w
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:32:33 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Steve Langasek 2010-07-05 <20100705164805.ga26...@dario.dodds.net>
> > I haven't seen anyone propose a good name that it can be changed *to*.
> > Shouldn't that be the first step?
> It would probably be "New Developer". But before ev
Re: Steve Langasek 2010-07-05 <20100705164805.ga26...@dario.dodds.net>
> I haven't seen anyone propose a good name that it can be changed *to*.
> Shouldn't that be the first step?
It would probably be "New Developer". But before everyone rushes to
update lots of documents, let's try to implement
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 07:21:08PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:14:03AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> >> Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
> >> try to explain these to potential contributors?
> >> C
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:14:03AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>> Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
>> try to explain these to potential contributors?
>>
>> Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it
>> is?
Hi,
On Montag, 5. Juli 2010, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> As they seem to be often used in a shortened version, is there any way,
> we can prevent "Debian maintainers" and "Package maintainers" both to be
> maintainers?
rename "Debian maintainers" to "Debian uploaders"?
cheers,
H
Hi!
Am 05.07.2010 15:31, schrieb Jan Dittberner:
> In my opinion there should be a clear distinction between
>
> - Package maintainers
> - Debian maintainers (DM)
> - Debian developers (DD)
As they seem to be often used in a shortened version, is there any way,
we can prevent "Debian maintainer
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Ludovico Cavedon wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 11:14 PM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> >Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
> >try to explain these to potential contributors?
> >
> >Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indica
On 07/02/2010 11:14 PM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
try to explain these to potential contributors?
Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it is?
It also took me some time to figure out correct meaning
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:14:03AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> > Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it
> > is?
Seconded.
> Speaking with various people about the ways they can join Debian, I've
> had several time the feeling that o
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:14:03AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
> try to explain these to potential contributors?
>
> Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it
> is?
Seconded.
Speaking with variou
26 matches
Mail list logo
