Re: long term goals of debian membership
> I submit that I have not gotten personal with you, so to be very blunt, if
> your comments are only going to be personal attacks, then just shut the
> hell up.
Not even going to go here.
> Obviously you think I have this vision that me being a developers is this
> "cool" thing that I want to keep from everyone else. Quite the contrary.
> As someone who puts a great deal of time into the project, it has become
> very personal for me. I want to make sure the Debian project is kept up to
> standards. When Debian first started, only actual developers were bold
> enough to even begin messing with it. Now, in this popular time of Linux,
> everyone wants to be a Debian developer just to wear the name tag. We need
> a way to keep the superficials out, while still allowing real honest to
> god volunteers in. Allowing "everyone" to get in, and shitcan them later
> is only going to make the administration harder, and get feelings hurt
> (give them something, then take it back). Plus you have things where
> people have been in the project for years and shouldn't get canned for a
> few months of innactivity. So it would be hard to justify canning anyone
> (currently you have to break some serious rules to get this).
Or, to package the little things people find insanely useful. Ben, I think
you need to realise - you don't have to be packaging glibc, Netscape, X and
the kernel to get in. I, for one, am only taking one - an IRC script - to
start off with. When you teach a baby to swim, do you throw it in the deep
end and wait for it to drown, and occasionally reaching in to bob it up? Or
do you put it in the wading pool, and let 'em in the main pool when they're
more experienced? Of course the latter. People like myself don't want to be
drowning in bug reports, etc, when we're just learning the ropes. Hence the
1-package maintainers. (disclaimer: I am in the NM queue, with said package
all dpkg'd, however the upstream author won't let me release pre's, and I
refuse to package the previous version because it's buggy and outdated).
> So everyone who wants to be a a developer, no matter what the reason,
> should be allowed!? I think someone on IRC said this best "NM is closed,
> just email firstname.lastname@example.org with your prefered username as the subject
> and your gpg key attached and scripts will create your account".
> This is silly. Being a developer entails some form of responsibility, even
> if this is a volunteer effort. Not asking people to be responsible is
> stupid. Also, if people are really that interested in working within the
> Debian ranks, then they will be able to handle some time on the low end.
> Obviously when you start working at Red Cross, you aren't given the same
> responsbilities as a seasoned volunteer. You are also not given the same
> access to facilities and decision making. You have to work your way up,
> just like any organization. Like starting out in a company in the
> proverbial "mail room".
No shit. But do you go to the developers when you're doing the garbo thing
and grabbing their bins and ask if you can practice your C on their
machines? Of course not! You learn it a bit, maybe ask the developers for
_tips_, but then you say to the boss, "look, I'm pretty good at C, how about
making me a developer?".
> Again, silly to think it's so easy to just release someone. With your
> tactic, we allow 5000 developers, and we have to weed through logs and
> reports just to decide who to kick out this month. More work for the weary
> administrators. How bold of you to give them more of a work load.
I have to (partially) side with you on this one. I think the screening is a
Good Thing(tm) ... to a certain extent, where it becomes useless and stupid.
Take, for instance, beaurocracy. Great idea, but often it requires signing
forms in triplicate and going through official chains and blah blah blah.
Just because it's a good idea, don't take it _too_ far.
> I really don't see how my ego is flapping. Obviously some peoples view of
> me lessens with these statements, but that doesn't mean I should hide my
> opinions, nor change them to suit "the social view" of others. If you want
> a follower of the hurd (not GNU/Hurd :), go check some where else.
I'm not going to comment (much) on this, either, because I just lurk and
don't really know you, but my view has lessened a little, and you do seem to
be quite condescending to the NMs because you're a full maintainer. For me,
I can sum most of your points up in a few bullet points:
* NMs must be shit, because they're NMs.
[No comment there].
* If they don't take on 999999999 packages _immediately_ before they apply,
[See point in the first couple of paragraphs].
* Why should _any_ NMs bother joining? Just get someone else to sponsor
[Most do get sponsorship first].
* They need to be committed! But, because they're NMs, and not people like
me who everyone knows, they can't be!
[Commitment != Profile != Ego].
My $au0.02 (sadly, only 1c .us ... ok, $au0.04 ... 2c US).