On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
> > I don't think there's any way to make that easier until we have
> > more people who fit into those positions wanting to become DDs.
>
> It's a bit more complex than that. You, for example, were active on
> -legal and in a few other non-technical w
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Remember, you're the idiot who started the polemic "... bullshit.
> > If they would really care ..." lunacy that I was mimicking. That
> > is unacceptable behaviour and I ask you to correct it.
>
> I really don't t
> > AMs, the DAM and other people in the project are more hesitant to
> > grant developership to people with non-standard forms of
> > contributions. Sometimes, it's simply harder to test for these
> > because there aren't templates or even qualified AMs!
>
> Sure; it's basically a case of no one
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:27:52PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
> >Which makes "Maintainer" unsuitble for translation maintainers how,
> >exactly?
>
> Because translators mostly don't "maintain" translations but plainly
> "contribute" translations.
Err, no. It is generally preferred that those who t
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 12:52:36AM +0300, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> On 4/7/06, Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm sorry. If we can't trust these people not to abuse upload
> > > privileges, then I certainly do not want to see them get a say in
> > > deciding how we conduct
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:33:48PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
>
> On 2006/04/07, at 1:39, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >>But requiring people who are not software developers to understand
> >>they suddenly have become developers because Debian is special is a
> >>little far fetched.
> >
> >I don't see wh
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:31:12PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
> >>Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian contributor
> >>and not use Debian at all ?
> >
> >No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant here. You
> >cannot be an active Debian contributor without knowing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi, sorry to arrive late to the party, but I would like to give a
non-DD translator point of view on this thread.
On 04/05/2006 08:02 AM, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 April 2006 11:44, JC Helary wrote:
>>There is a huge confusion between being
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 01:02:48PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:39:15PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> I don't see why it shouldn't be sufficient for the "has already done
> good work for Debian" part of the existing proce
On Sat, 08 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
> > As a final note, the templates are just that, templates. An AM is
> > relatively free to tailor the process to the job that the applicant is
> > actually performing. This is a bit more time consuming for the AM, but
> > it's ideal for applicants w
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
>> you're free to submit patches. Until then, I'd prefer if you would not
>> reply in a purely polemic way, as your contribution to actually solve
>> the problem isn't identifiable.
> Remember, you're the idiot wh
> * Benj. Mako Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006:04:06 15:35 -0400]:
> >
> > > Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > I think that the fact that the upload keyring is the same as the
> > > > voting keyring is bad. Contributors are told they can't vote until
> > > > they learn
> As a final note, the templates are just that, templates. An AM is
> relatively free to tailor the process to the job that the applicant is
> actually performing. This is a bit more time consuming for the AM, but
> it's ideal for applicants who are involved in non-traditional roles in
> Debian.
> > I'd like to see those who have made long-term, sustained, and
> > significant contributions to Debian enfranchised. That could mean
> > broadening the category of developer through changes to NM or it
> > could also mean another enfranchised category of contributor. That's
> > what I read as t
> > (1) We as a project (and an NM project) are hesitant to give these
> > people developership since it means they can upload to the
> > project which introduces a set of potential risks and problems
> > (one more account to compromise, etc).
>
> I'm sorry. If we can't trust these people
Scripsit Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:39:15PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> A translator whose general modus operandi is leave his translation
>> unmaintained once it is written should not become a voting member of
>> Debian anyway - not any more than a packager w
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> you're free to submit patches. Until then, I'd prefer if you would not
> reply in a purely polemic way, as your contribution to actually solve
> the problem isn't identifiable.
Remember, you're the idiot who started the polemic "... bullshit.
If t
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:39:15PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> Which makes "Maintainer" unsuitble for translation maintainers how,
> >> exactly?
>
> > Because translators mostly don't "maintain" translations but plainly
> > "contribute" translatio
On 4/8/06, Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> By your argument, then the USA should give all its citizens access to
> >> our nuclear arsenal, launch codes, etc. because we trust them to have
> >> a say in deciding how the government is run.
> >
> > Hmm, I see, you see yourself as govern
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 06:48:27AM -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:35:54AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:55, Erinn Clark wrote:
> >>
> >>> Do you mean this question? (Actually about ld, but it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> On 4/7/06, Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I'm sorry. If we can't trust these people not to abuse upload
>>> privileges, then I certainly do not want to see them get a say in
>>> deciding how we conduct
On 4/7/06, Micah Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm sorry. If we can't trust these people not to abuse upload
> > privileges, then I certainly do not want to see them get a say in
> > deciding how we conduct the project's business.
>
> By your argument, then the USA should give
On 7 Apr 2006, Micah Anderson outgrape:
> On 2006-04-06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 6 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill told this:
>>
>>>
And maybe I'm too heavily steeped in Debian culture to take an
objective view, but I don't see any reason why translators,
docume
On 7 Apr 2006, JC Helary spake thusly:
>>> Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian
>>> contributor and not use Debian at all ?
>>
>> No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant
>> here. You cannot be an active Debian contributor without knowing
>> about its culture
Re: Manoj Srivastava 2006-04-06 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >> And maybe I'm too heavily steeped in Debian culture to take an
> >> objective view, but I don't see any reason why translators,
> >> documentation writers, artists, et al. should look at the term
> >> "developer" and conclude it's not fo
Scripsit JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Which makes "Maintainer" unsuitble for translation maintainers how,
>> exactly?
> Because translators mostly don't "maintain" translations but plainly
> "contribute" translations.
A translator whose general modus operandi is leave his translation
unmaint
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> That's total bullshit. If they would really care about joining, they
>> could simply start to read the documentation, which explicitly shows
>> them how to understand the term maintainer and/or developer.
> That's to
On 2006-04-06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill told this:
>
>>
>>> And maybe I'm too heavily steeped in Debian culture to take an
>>> objective view, but I don't see any reason why translators,
>>> documentation writers, artists, et al. should look at t
On 2006/04/07, at 1:39, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
But requiring people who are not software developers to understand
they suddenly have become developers because Debian is special is a
little far fetched.
I don't see why.
Because the term does not apply to non coders in a normal software
cont
Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian contributor
and not use Debian at all ?
No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant here. You
cannot be an active Debian contributor without knowing about its
culture, which is what Marc was talking about.
What is Debian
Which makes "Maintainer" unsuitble for translation maintainers how,
exactly?
Because translators mostly don't "maintain" translations but plainly
"contribute" translations.
Ie. Translators mainly _translate_.
What do you call translation maintenance anyway ?
What are the contributors doin
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:35:54AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:55, Erinn Clark wrote:
>>
>>> Do you mean this question? (Actually about ld, but it's the closest one
>>> I found that seemed appropriately irrelevant.)
>>>
>>> I3
El viernes, 7 de abril de 2006 a las 19:27:52 +0900, JC Helary escribía:
> Because translators mostly don't "maintain" translations but plainly
> "contribute" translations.
> Ie. Translators mainly _translate_.
> What do you call translation maintenance anyway ?
Well, after a translation is m
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That's total bullshit. If they would really care about joining, they
> could simply start to read the documentation, which explicitly shows
> them how to understand the term maintainer and/or developer.
That's total bullshit. Do you read all documentati
Scripsit Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > I3. What is the -Bsymbolic ld flag, exactly what does it do, and
>> > how that differs from library symbol versioning? What problems do
>> > -Bsymbolic linking solve? Why is libc6 not compiled with -Bsymbolic?
> I've never maintained a C
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
> > Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > I think that the fact that the upload keyring is the same as the
> > > voting keyring is bad. Contributors are told they can't vote
> > > until they learn C compiler flags.
> >
> > Who tells con
Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > I think that the fact that the upload keyring is the same as the
>> > voting keyring is bad. Contributors are told they can't vote until
>> > they learn C compiler flags.
>> Who tells contribu
On 6 Apr 2006, Eddy Petrişor said:
> On 4/6/06, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian
>>> contributor and not use Debian at all ?
>>
>> No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant
>> here. You cannot be an active Deb
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:35:54AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:55, Erinn Clark wrote:
> > Do you mean this question? (Actually about ld, but it's the closest one
> > I found that seemed appropriately irrelevant.)
> >
> > I3. What is the -Bsymbolic ld flag, exactly wha
On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:55, Erinn Clark wrote:
> Do you mean this question? (Actually about ld, but it's the closest one
> I found that seemed appropriately irrelevant.)
>
> I3. What is the -Bsymbolic ld flag, exactly what does it do, and
> how that differs from library symbol versioning?
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Unfortunately, I think most if that is from before we drove
> her away from Debian into the arms of Ubuntu.
Clytie is on record as IIRC, using OSX and contributing to as many
translations of free software projects as she can, whether she
personally uses them or n
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 17:56:06 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:35:38 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Of your last 20 recorded uses of the word "Maintainer" on
> > > debian lists before this thread that I found, you use it once
> > > in another meaning
On 4/6/06, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nobody's saying that you are going to stop being a developer. You can
> > be proud of what you do being a developer. You've earned that status.
> >
> > But requiring people who are not software developers to understand
> > they suddenly have
On 4/6/06, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Did it ever occur to you that one can be an active Debian contributor
> > and not use Debian at all ?
>
> No. And even if it did, I fail to see how that is relevant here. You
> cannot be an active Debian contributor without knowing about its
* Benj. Mako Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006:04:06 15:35 -0400]:
>
> > Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > I think that the fact that the upload keyring is the same as the
> > > voting keyring is bad. Contributors are told they can't vote until
> > > they learn C compiler fla
On 6 Apr 2006, Lars Wirzenius uttered the following:
> to, 2006-04-06 kello 15:05 -0500, Manoj Srivastava kirjoitti:
>> On 6 Apr 2006, JC Helary said:
>>> Obviously this thread started with somebody who is a very active
>>> contributor for whom it was unclear.
>>
>> Active contributor to Ubuntu, I
to, 2006-04-06 kello 15:05 -0500, Manoj Srivastava kirjoitti:
> On 6 Apr 2006, JC Helary said:
> > Obviously this thread started with somebody who is a very active
> > contributor for whom it was unclear.
>
> Active contributor to Ubuntu, I think. She should get Ubuntu
> voting rights.
A
On 6 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill told this:
>
>> And maybe I'm too heavily steeped in Debian culture to take an
>> objective view, but I don't see any reason why translators,
>> documentation writers, artists, et al. should look at the term
>> "developer" and conclude it's not for them.
>
> First,
On 6 Apr 2006, JC Helary said:
>
> On 2006/04/06, at 22:50, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>
>> And anyway, it's not like people who should consider to join have
>> nothing to do with Debian and don't know the particularities of its
>> culture - even if this is unclear to people who are new to Debi
On 6 Apr 2006, JC Helary uttered the following:
>
> On 2006/04/06, at 23:18, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
>
>> Also even if -from an outsiders perspective- the jargon used is
>> quirky and strange. I have to wonder: if one is not even willing to
>> look at the jargon used by the project from
> Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I think that the fact that the upload keyring is the same as the
> > voting keyring is bad. Contributors are told they can't vote until
> > they learn C compiler flags.
>
> Who tells contributors that nonsense?
Have you read the NM process
> And maybe I'm too heavily steeped in Debian culture to take an
> objective view, but I don't see any reason why translators,
> documentation writers, artists, et al. should look at the term
> "developer" and conclude it's not for them.
First, none of these groups usually think of the work that
> On 4 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill spake thusly:
>
> >
> >> The problem is more one of 'how do we identify those people that
> >> aren't a Developer, but that do contribute regularly'.
> >
> > There are a number of ways of doing this although, like NM, it's
> > ultimately a human process that is c
JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2006/04/06, at 22:50, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> And anyway, it's not like people who should consider to join have
>> nothing to do with Debian and don't know the particularities of its
>> culture - even if this is unclear to people who are new to De
Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:35:38 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> > Of your last 20 recorded uses of the word "Maintainer" on
> > debian lists before this thread that I found, you use it once
> > in another meaning (webmaster) and that was uncapitalised.
>
> Which makes "Ma
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 10:29:54PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
>
> On 2006/04/06, at 22:21, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> >If people don't understand that you don't have to write code to be a
> >developer, then they should be told. If they are told, and they
> >misunderstand, then that is a bug which sh
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 11:33:05PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
>
> On 2006/04/06, at 22:50, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>
> >And anyway, it's not like people who should consider to join have
> >nothing to do with Debian and don't know the particularities of its
> >culture - even if this is unclear
On 2006/04/06, at 23:18, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
Also even if -from an outsiders perspective- the jargon used is
quirky and
strange. I have to wonder:
if one is not even willing to look at the jargon used by the
project from
the projects point of view. Then why on earth would one
On 2006/04/06, at 22:50, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
And anyway, it's not like people who should consider to join have
nothing to do with Debian and don't know the particularities of its
culture - even if this is unclear to people who are new to Debian, it
should be no problem for an active c
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:35:38 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 14:18:13 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> > > [...] It seems better to name it after the
> > > target of the process, what they become - a Developer.
> >
> > The Maintainer mentioned in a package
Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 14:18:13 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] It seems better to name it after the
> > target of the process, what they become - a Developer.
>
> The Maintainer mentioned in a package control field is a Package
> Maintainer.
>
> I fail to see wh
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 22:29:54 +0900 JC Helary wrote:
> The bug is in the relation between "from new maintainer->to
> developer" and the corollary "other contributors don't _need_ to
> become developers".
>
> However true that technically is, it clearly does not contribute to
> the well-being
* JC Helary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060406 16:14]:
> However true that technically is, it clearly does not contribute to
> the well-being of non-maintainer contributors in the Project.
I agree to that statement - but that shouldn't make us replace the nice
term Debian Developer with a not-so-nice t
On Thursday 06 April 2006 15:29, JC Helary wrote:
> Nobody's saying that you are going to stop being a developer. You can
> be proud of what you do being a developer. You've earned that status.
>
> But requiring people who are not software developers to understand
> they suddenly have become develo
On 2006/04/06, at 22:21, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
If people don't understand that you don't have to write code to be a
developer, then they should be told. If they are told, and they
misunderstand, then that is a bug which should be fixed. But don't go
around claiming that I'm suddenly not a "dev
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 14:18:13 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be?
> >
> > Why does it need to be changed? People maintain websites,
> > translations, documentation, packages - I don't see a reason to
JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> (We also have plenty of people who contribute heavily to the
>> project without being recognized as members; but I think that
>> "member" is a lesser title that doesn't do justice to their
>> contributions -- I want to see these people recognized as
>> *d
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 07:19:22AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> you and others use the word 'contributing', 'contribute',
> 'contributions'. So why not 'Debian Contributor'.
Ghaah.
Because I'm a developer, who develops an operating system, not just
someone who merely 'contributes' to it
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be?
>
> Why does it need to be changed? People maintain websites, translations,
> documentation, packages - I don't see a reason to change the current
> name.
It seems to cause confusion wit
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> The 'Maintainer' in NM is a misnomer, I understand it is possible to go
>> through NM as a translator or documentation writer.
> I also had replies from Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt and Eddy Petrişor
> saying simila
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 02:30:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 05:24:26PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
> > >Disadvantage, because the change will not be so evident from the
> > >outside (more of a publicity issue, but that is what a part of the
> > >problem is, so we need to c
No because, as you'll see in my edits to cobako's proposal, the aim
is to have people think in terms of "membership" and not in terms of
"developership". Which will obviously make it easier for long term
non-maintainer contributors to understand that they are also welcome.
All this is really a per
JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No because, as you'll see in my edits to cobako's proposal, the aim =20
> is to have people think in terms of "membership" and not in terms of =20
> "developership". Which will obviously make it easier for long term =20
> non-maintainer contributors to understand tha
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 05:24:26PM +0900, JC Helary wrote:
> >Disadvantage, because the change will not be so evident from the
> >outside (more of a publicity issue, but that is what a part of the
> >problem is, so we need to change the image that DD=package maintainer)
> No because, as you'll see
On 2006/04/06, at 17:00, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
On 4/6/06, JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be?
New Member ?
That would have the advantage (and disadvantage, at the same time) the
the abbreviation stays the same.
And also the a
On 4/6/06, JC Helary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be?
>
> New Member ?
That would have the advantage (and disadvantage, at the same time) the
the abbreviation stays the same.
Advantage, because of people inertia calling it "NM"
Disadva
On 2006/04/06, at 15:27, MJ Ray wrote:
We've thoroughly queered the pitch now, but how many translators
or documenters believed they could go through NM?
I think what matters more than the process itself is what Clytie just
wrote:
The point is, Frans, since I started this discussion, that
"cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The 'Maintainer' in NM is a misnomer, I understand it is possible to go
> through NM as a translator or documentation writer.
I also had replies from Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt and Eddy PetriÅor
saying similar things. The first two paragraphs of the
> How is "making long-term, sustained, and significant contributions to
> Debian" _not_ "engaging in development"?
If you think that Debian's long-time pro-bono legal counsel is
engaging in development, I think we're just getting bogged down in
semantics. I'm saying we should be able to take sign
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 07:27:03AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > [...] and b) there is no clear-cut and
> > objective criteria currently to identify those people who do make
> > regular contributions without being a developer.
>
> Unless something has changed since
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:45:50AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 3 Apr 2006, Wouter Verhelst outgrape:
>
> > I don't have any problems per se with non-DD contributors being
> > allowed to vote on matters of purely technical substance.
>
> I have a problem with _anyone_ voting on a m
On 2006/04/05, at 21:53, Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 14:27, JC Helary wrote:
Besides, the systematic use of "developer" is also confusing and to
clarify things should be replaced my "member" as is also hinted in
the same document.
You cannot change the word "developer" to "mem
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 14:27, JC Helary wrote:
> Besides, the systematic use of "developer" is also confusing and to
> clarify things should be replaced my "member" as is also hinted in
> the same document.
You cannot change the word "developer" to "member" without changing the
Debian Constit
On 2006/04/05, at 20:53, Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 13:14, JC Helary wrote:
I am not sure what point you are trying to make ?
The point I'm trying to make is that it seems like translators are
waiting
for the mountain to come to them (change procedures, make entry
easier)
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 13:14, JC Helary wrote:
> I am not sure what point you are trying to make ?
The point I'm trying to make is that it seems like translators are waiting
for the mountain to come to them (change procedures, make entry easier).
It does not work like that: you have to go to
On 2006/04/05, at 20:02, Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 11:44, JC Helary wrote:
There is a huge confusion between being a developer and having
technical rights, and being a developer and having political rights.
I seriously do wonder why translators, if they really want to get t
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 11:44, JC Helary wrote:
> There is a huge confusion between being a developer and having
> technical rights, and being a developer and having political rights.
I seriously do wonder why translators, if they really want to get the
developer status, don't get together and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 09:43:57PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> >> Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> > It's argueably
On 4/5/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can someone who is not a package maintainer become a
> developer, if becoming a developer requires being a maintainer?
Not quite, if you contribue to different areas with your effort, you
can bexom a DD, see NM page.
--
Regards,
EddyP
===
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Now, if there are people like that who are not DD's, the
>> question we must ask, is wjy are they not DD's? If they are putting
>> in the work, and have the same commitment as a DD does, even if they
>> do not
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Now, if there are people like that who are not DD's, the
> question we must ask, is wjy are they not DD's? If they are putting
> in the work, and have the same commitment as a DD does, even if they
> do not package stuff, why is the project not tre
> Please help out the MIA process. It would really be
> appreciated.
The MIA process does not address the type of people that are the
object of my complaints.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scripsit Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > It's argueably the most important right that is reserved for developers
>> > but it does not necessary stand to reason that it should be
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > It's argueably the most important right that is reserved for developers
> > but it does not necessary stand to reason that it should be reserved
> > only for those who engage in
On 4 Apr 2006, Clint Adams stated:
>> In other words, those who are responsible, decide.
>
> I agree. So let's divest of their voting privileges those DDs who
> don't contribute enough. We have several hundred of those.
Please help out the MIA process. It would really be
appreciated.
On 4 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill stated:
>
>> Most developers seem to agree that there are bugs in our process
>> for integrating new members into the project, but that's not the
>> same as saying that non-DDs should be allowed to vote
>
> Clearly not.
>
>> voting rights are one of the few privileg
On 4 Apr 2006, Henning Makholm verbalised:
> Scripsit Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On 3 Apr 2006, Wouter Verhelst outgrape:
>
>>> I don't have any problems per se with non-DD contributors being
>>> allowed to vote on matters of purely technical substance.
>
>> I have a problem with _any
On 4 Apr 2006, Benj. Mako Hill spake thusly:
>
>> The problem is more one of 'how do we identify those people that
>> aren't a Developer, but that do contribute regularly'.
>
> There are a number of ways of doing this although, like NM, it's
> ultimately a human process that is carried out in the
> In other words, those who are responsible, decide.
I agree. So let's divest of their voting privileges those DDs who
don't contribute enough. We have several hundred of those.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROT
Scripsit "Benj. Mako Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It's argueably the most important right that is reserved for developers
> but it does not necessary stand to reason that it should be reserved
> only for those who engage in development.
>
> I'd like to see those who have made long-term, sustained,
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
