Re: AM reports
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> A log of the relevant parts of the discussion with the applicant is
> a required part of the AM's report, as explained in the "Note for
> Application Managers". Even if it weren't it appears to me most evident
> to keep track of the discussion with the applicant.
Since when? This wasn't a requirement for the first 4 developers whom I
helped usher through the NM process. And what's evident to you doesn't
imply policy. First of all, it presumes that the thing is going to take
place via IRC or email. What if it's done face-to-face over a beer?
> I do not understand why you smell the "we trust some Debian developers more
> than others" here. Are you, as AM, fealing being untrusted by the
> NM-committee? Or do you mean trusting or not the applicant?
The former. In fact, it seems to me that the AM is not trusted to judge
the applicant's responses to P&P questions if someone else needs to see
them. So why should I waste my time trying to guess what the DAM wants to
see for this section?
Anyway, for the applicant in question we conducted the P&P chat in German.
Is that ok? (/me kicks himself in the head for *not* logging that chat).
It seemed best to speak with the applicant in his mother tongue to get his
feeling for philosophy issues.
Sorry to take such a defensive tone, but the NM process is long and
complicated enough without constantly changing rules (re: photo ID) and
now diminishing the contribution of the AM to being a programming-free
version a goddamn webform.
tony mancill
<tmancill@debian.org>
tony@mancill.com | Danger + Survival = Fun
http://www.debian.org | (Neil Peart)
Reply to: