Re: Reforming the NM process
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Christoph Berg wrote:
> As I said on IRC, I would be interested myself to have such a central
> place to store my NM communication. What I don't want is any tool that
> would be used to check if a particular AM is inactive, slacking,
> unresponsive etc. Every AM whom I've asked what he thought about a
> central mailstore said "no thanks I like my privacy". At first I
> couldn't understand these reservations, but from reading the recent
> postings in this and the related threads, I do share them. AM bashing
> is the last thing that would help to improve the NM process, and even
> if not stated explicitely, the intention behind that MIA style DB
> seems (seemed?) to be the ability to check AM activity.
MIA is *not* a process for "bashind DD". And this central repository
wouldn't be a process to bash AM either ... but yes it gives more
transparency about what the applicants do and about the AM too.
That's why it's good. It allows a new AM to check how other people are
doing the same job, it allows peer review in some cases, it allows the FD
to see whether someone should be put on hold instead of being assigned to
an AM for 4 months without any progress, etc.
In the last case, yes it's up to the AM to put its applicant on hold, but
not everybody does that carefully, so a gentle reminder can certainly be
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :