[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: developer status again

>>"David" == David Welton <davidw@gate.cks.com> writes:

 David> Are the requirements spelled out somewhere?  I feel rather strongly,
 David> that, if we are to reject people, the criteria ought to be clear.
 David> Either that, or it ought to clear that certain people have the final
 David> say over who qualifies, and it is totally up to their judgement.

	This came up before (beginning of the month), and I think we
 agreed on 
 a) The applicant provide a means of proving identity
 b) The applicant read the social contract, and the DFSG, and the
    applicant understand and endorse those documents [quick rationale:
    a group like debian depends on cooperation and common goals to not
    thrash itself apart; and the dfsg is a core component of debian
    developers common beliefs]
 c) The applicant provide a telephone number or other means of direct

	People are rejected if 
 (a) they do not agree to support the DFSG, and not be
     destructive/malicious, and to be responsible for their packages,
     and serious about the project,
 (b) their identities can not be verified.

	I am not sure, but do we also check to see if the applicant
 has some idea of the work they are going to be doing? So that we do
 not get people who merely get an account on master and a subscription
 to -private without contributing anything? 

        For the most part, a common interest and philosophy have kept
 us mostly together (though we are more fractious than some of us
 would prefer). As the project grows, the need to keep all the members
 more or less on the same page is going to be increasingly critical. 

        Diversity may indeed be wonderful for a larger enterprise, or
 for a project where the motivation is monetary, but a volunteer
 project can rip itself to shreds rapidly over serious internal
 dissention stemming from deep, ingrained philosophical differences.

        I think the new maintainer team has been doing a pretty good
 job, all things considered.

 David> That said, I don't know if we are indeed rejecting people or not, so
 David> this may be a moot point.

	I don't think anyone has actually been rejected yet.

 Love your enemies: they'll go crazy trying to figure out what you're
 up to.
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

Reply to: