Re: NM process, AMs, advocates, mentors and applicants
Craig Small <email@example.com> writes:
> Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I wish that AMs could spend even *more* time per applicant than is
>> currently spent following the standard templates. Marc was my AM and
>> did a T&S evaluation based on solving real problems in Debian
> While that sounds great, it sounds more of a mentor role than an AM role
> to me. The problem is an AM doesn't get to choose their NM and there
> can often be a great mis-match of skills.
Hm, it didn't seem like a mentor role to me. Being a mentor involves
telling the mentee how to solve a problem and helping them work through
the learning process. Marc likely would have been willing to do some of
that for me, but that isn't really what happened. He gave me tasks, I
researched on my own how to do them if I didn't already know, I did them,
I sent him the results, and he evaluated the results.
It felt more like a practical examination to me than a mentor
> Think of two AMs, one knows perl and the other C network daemons. And
> then two applicants, again with same skills. You have a 50/50 chance of
> aligning the skills, and in some ways more importantly, the interest of
> the AM and NM.
Marc occasionally had someone else evalute the results of a particular
task, such as letting a release manager evaluate how well I did at
managing a library transition. That seems like a reasonable solution to
that problem, but of course takes even more time.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>