Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted.
Scripsit Will Newton <will@misconception.org.uk>
> Can anyone tell me why the DAM has to make any kind of decision?
> Surely we can trust the judgement of our AMs?
Letting people into the project and giving them upload rights, votes,
et cetera, is a fairly serious matter. I, as a user, would not as
happily use Debian if this was done solely on the basis of one
individual's judgement. No matter whether that individual is
trustworthy in general, he is human and may make mistakes.
Currently there are three persons involved with clearing a prospective
developer (in the unproblematic base case): the advocate, the AM, and
the DAM. I would not say that that is one too many.
Does it follow by logical necessity that the third person has to be
the DAM? There has to be someone in that position, someone with the
guts to sometimes say no where the AM has said yes. And it is
desirable that, if possible, it is the same person each time, for
consistency in the processs. So there we have the DAM's job
description.
It does not necessarily follow that the DAM hat needs to be worn
together with the exact complement of hats that it is currently
sharing a head with, but it is esay to see sound practical reasons for
it to at least go together with keyring maintainer and machine
administrator hats. In any case, any problems attributable to hat
concentration are better solved by rearranging hats than by changing
the NM process. (There seems to be a rather screaming lack of
consensus about *whether* there is currently any problem worth solving
in that way; I do not have sufficient first-hand experience to form an
opinion about that question).
--
Henning Makholm "Uh ... a picture of me with my hair pinned up
in a towel and standing in front of a grid without a
trace of makeup? *Are you out of your rock-happy mind?*"
Reply to: