On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:27:03PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 09:59:09AM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote: > > - Debian Developing Member (DDM) = what's called DD in the proposal. > > Given how rooted is the acronym DD in the Debian community, I doubt it > is a good idea to change it or even to get rid of it. True, but the proposal splits the current DD in two types, namely DDM and DNDM. Currently DNDM doesn't exist, but people who aren't using upload rights because that's not what they're doing for Debian are also DD. So at least one of them is going to get a new name. It would be very nice to have a naming where DDM (or perhaps just DM) would still be DD, but I couldn't think of a scheme where that was possible while still showing the logic of the roles. Calling every member a "developer" just doesn't make sense. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://a82-93-13-222.adsl.xs4all.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature