Re: Reforming the NM process
On 25 Apr 2006, Panu Kalliokoski said:
> I hoped the proposal I was making would allow us to eat the cake and
> keep it too: offer an open upload area but keep the main archive
> under strict quality criteria. I expect it to be easier to check
> package quality, too, if they're being autobuilt and available for
> BTS reports _before_ having been uploaded to the main archive.
This open area for uploads does not need to be offered by
Debian, does it? Anyone who thinks this is a good idea can set up an
anon-ftp area and gather random debs. I seem to recall we already
have one such unofficial repository -- but, people can always add
>> Besides, there is no value in a wide-open voting system. This is
>> called an "Internet poll" and the results generally reflect
>> whatever websites or blogs happen to publicise it.
> Not if those people have to be properly identified via their PGP
> keys. Such a simple requirement will already cut off the "casual
> Joes" that only vote once because they saw the announcement
> somewhere. It also prevents most ways of abuse.
Again, anyone can set up such a voting mechanism. Collect
keys, check out devotee, and you are good to go.
Often, in free software, just getting up and doing things is
far more successful than trying to talk other people into doing the
You cannot shake hands with a clenched fist. Indira Gandhi
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C