On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 05:34:39PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Sadly, I'm having trouble coming up with a nice, catchy name that would
> avoid confusion. Something like "Debian Outside Contributor" is clear
> enough, but it's more awkward and sounds kind of negative to my ear.
It sounds abso
Le Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 05:52:49PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit :
>
> We've seen in the past that capable people can pass through NM very quickly,
> where most of the waiting is for FD, DAM approval. If the need is really
> high, people can and are already be fasttracked.
Dear Thijs, dear DDs
The question of whether we should do this at all aside, I'd like to
discuss the issue of what to call the new second-class packagers.
Traditionally, members of Debian have been called "Debian Developers".
However, colloquially we are also often referred to as "Debian packagers"
or "Debian mai
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 05:52:49PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Friday 22 June 2007 16:50, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Not for the benefit of that developer, but for our benefit. I have no fear
> > at all of Matthew Garrett doing an incompetent job of preparing packages;
> > why should we mak
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> If I wouldn't resign, I would feel like I'd too support the decision,
> even if I voted against it.
Unlike the DPL votes, I think that dissent would be public, so it's
obvious who didn't support the decision and very rarely a resigning
matter.
This
Joey Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm. By continueing to maintain your packages but losing voting rights
> you would still be part of the community but without the slightest chance
> to change anything. I guess, I didn't get your rationale. Err... Care
> to help me?
I do admit that my
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> like that culture. As a matter of fact, I'd be offended if someone would
> conclude that I underwrite e.g. flamewars because I'm a DD.
Let me take a not-entirely hypothetical example. Let's suppose that
the DAM's have decided to expel a developer who
Mark Brown wrote:
> In addition to the practical issues that Raphael raises a number of
> people have expressed a desire to maintian packages (and otherwise be
> involved in the technical side of Debian) without having any involvement
> in the political side of Debian.
Well, they are free to decid
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Can you be a bit more verbose as to why you could not just refrain
> > from using some rights that a DD has?
>
> I was close to resigning because I thought the Debian community was
> taking active steps to a wrong direction. I
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:22:16PM +0100, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The NM process is about making new DDs -- who participate fully in
> the project, and understand and agree with its goals. Not every useful
> contributor to Debian actually wants that status -- Matthew Garrett's one
> example of a for
On Friday 22 June 2007 16:50, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Not for the benefit of that developer, but for our benefit. I have no fear
> at all of Matthew Garrett doing an incompetent job of preparing packages;
> why should we make it hard for *Debian* to take advantage of his
> contributions?
Just to
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:05:04AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thursday 21 June 2007 19:22, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The NM process is about making new DDs -- who participate fully in
> > the project, and understand and agree with its goals. Not every useful
> > contributor to Debian actuall
On Thu, June 21, 2007 2:50 pm, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> So here's a proposal for the Debian Maintainers idea that's been floating
> around for some time now [0]. I've drafted it while lying in bed in
> the Budget Backpackers before wandering up to debconf, so it's just my
> take on thing
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> You say you knew several, so maybe you can give some details as to their
> reasons for this.
Yes, I already explained this I guess in some former thread.
I know Benjamin Bayart, who's a TeX expert and who uses some TeX packages
and tools that got rem
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:03:50AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The average (in)competence of DDs is what makes me believe that non-DDs
>> shouldn't get to upload whatever software they would like to
On Friday 22 June 2007 14:50, Mark Brown wrote:
> This depends. Like a number of other people I believe that it is
> important to exercise your right to vote whenever possible.
You can consider it important to exercise your right to vote *because* you
deem a specific system imporant to support i
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:22:17PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Anthony Towns ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 16:03]:
> > 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
> >It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring
> >tool, with commit
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 07:58:34PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote:
> If this thingy is only meant to bypass NM since it sucks or is pink
> or whatever, just say so and the proposal will be considered as such.
The NM process is designed to create new Debian Developers -- particularly
with the ability to
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:29:09PM +0100, Joey Hess wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Err, it doesn't seem ambiguous to me: it'll start this way and may change
> > later... If you'd like to suggest other wording, you're welcome to...
> If it's unambiguous, then the specification of what tools to us
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:03:50AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
> >It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring
> >tool, with commit p
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 01:06:30PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Since we do not ask new DD's to e.g. underwrite the mailinglist culture, I
> also do not see it as necessary to discontinue being a DD when you do not
> like that culture. As a matter of fact, I'd be offended if someone would
>
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 07:15:59PM +0200, Joey Schulze wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > The time involvement required to be DD is far bigger to the one required
> > to be able to maintain properly a single package. And I don't want to
> Could you explain how the "time involvement required to b
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> > main things tested by NM now seem to be tolerance of boredom, stupid
> > questions and poor social skills of DDs, along with the ability to
> > paraphrase from key docs, which are not really key indicators of who
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> * multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
>>> removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic
>>> uploads, un
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The
> main things tested by NM now seem to be tolerance of boredom, stupid
> questions and poor social skills of DDs, along with the ability to
> paraphrase from key docs, which are not really key indicators of who
> will be a good DD.
When I passed NM in early
On Friday 22 June 2007 12:39, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> I personally do feel that there are two distinct parts. First, there
> is the Debian archive, which is governed by our Social Contract.
> Second, there is the social community, ie. mailing lists and IRC,
> which isn't part of the SC. Now, if I do
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then we maybe just disagree here: I think that someone who opposes to
> Debian-the-community so much that they would want to explicitly disassociate
> themselves from the entire project, is not someone I would want to grant
> upload rights.
I person
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> Don't expect to make the NM system evolve if you can't be bothered to
> get implicated however (usual free software rule).
No no no - usual free software rule would allow creating a new
implementation and replacing or working around the broken-des
On Friday 22 June 2007 12:03, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> I was close to resigning because I thought the Debian community was
> taking active steps to a wrong direction. I wouldn't have wanted to be
> a part of such a community, even though I would have liked to continue
> contributing to the technical
On Friday 22 June 2007 11:14, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> If you don't believe what I said and what others said, shall we post on
> debian-devel-announce some sort of straw poll to see how many people would
> be interested?
"Don't believe" seems a bit over the top, but I'm indeed cautious of
introdu
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >* multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
>> > removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic
>> > uploads, un
[I am on the list and I thought my m-f-t is set correctly too, no need
to cc me on replies]
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can you be a bit more verbose as to why you could not just refrain
> from using some rights that a DD has?
I was close to resigning because I thought the Debia
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> It would be more convincing to me if we could get some concrete data: who
>> are
>> those people that are the target of this procedure? Why are current
>> structures (sponsorship or NM) not suitable for
On Friday 22 June 2007 11:49, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Recently I was thinking about resigning as a DD but still wanting to
> continue maintaining the few packages I have. Had that happened I
> would very much have liked to have something like DM available,
> instead of having to pester some other DD
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think I agree with you. I can see some use in the DM proposal for
> people on the way in to Debian, but not for those on the way out. I'd
> much rather see a clean break for those people leaving - if people
> have decided they no longer want to be DD t
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > * multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
> > removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic
> > uploads, unfixed bugs, or being unreasonably difficult to
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:05:04AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>On Thursday 21 June 2007 19:22, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> The NM process is about making new DDs -- who participate fully in
>> the project, and understand and agree with its goals. Not every useful
>> contributor to Debian actually wa
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> It would be more convincing to me if we could get some concrete data: who are
> those people that are the target of this procedure? Why are current
> structures (sponsorship or NM) not suitable for them? Can we get some
> concrete data instead of "I
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, MJ Ray wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> > If you want to improve the NM process, fine, the NM team awaits your help.
>
> Is that true? Is the NM team awaiting help to improve the process, or
> is it only awaiting help to operate the current process?
On Thursday 21 June 2007 19:22, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The NM process is about making new DDs -- who participate fully in
> the project, and understand and agree with its goals. Not every useful
> contributor to Debian actually wants that status -- Matthew Garrett's one
> example of a former DD who
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
>It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring
>tool, with commit priveleges initially assigned to:
>
> * the Debian Account Managers (Joerg
41 matches
Mail list logo
