Re: long term goals of debian membership
galt@inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) wrote:
> You still don't get it, do you? There is no deserve, there is only do
> or do not.
So what is wrong with asking potential developers to "do" before we let
them in? Nobody is preventing them from working on Debian now; the
software is FREE after all. We do not own it, and anyone is allowed to
play with it, fix it, and suggest improvements.
> I agree, if they don't do, shitcan them: but then you'd best have a
> replacement ready to go.
If they don't do, then they don't get in. It's as simple as that.
Nevertheless, I would like the term "Debian developer" to refer to
someone who has actually DONE something for Debian.
> The thing you don't get is no matter how tough you make the screening,
> circumstances change. People get new jobs that require them to
> sacrifice volunteer work for paid work, people lose interest,
> any number of things. ATM, they post a quick intent to orphan
> and packages stay orphaned for three years in some cases because
> there's nobody to adopt them. I'd hope you're on -qa, because every
> additional barrier to entry makes -qa's job that much bigger.
Yes. The problem is many in the screaming hordes at our gates trying
to get in do not take the time to adopt these packages, work on them,
love them, feed them, and fix them. You do not need to have the label
"Debian developer" to work on orphaned packages. All you need to do is
fix bugs. I know, it's how I got my start. IMHO, it is the perfect
preparation for the life of a developer.
When you have something significant to contribute, then we'll let you
in. If you don't have the patience to deal with that, then what kind of
developer will you make when userland starts slinging bug reports your
way?
Don't forget that Debian has a reputation to uphold. Whenever one of
our developers answers a bug report (or more importantly, DOESN'T answer
a bug report), it is a direct reflection on us as a group. Certainly,
allowing someone who has done nothing for us and whom we don't even know
to represent us is not a wise idea. (We have enough trouble with the
problems caused by our productive members. ... *grin*)
- Brian
Reply to: