On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 12:23:27PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >>"Neal" == Neal H Walfield <neal@cs.uml.edu> writes: > > >> when then do you want to apply for new maintainer? > Neal> I want to be a Debian maintainer because I want to help > Neal> maintain Debian. > > That sounds quite laudable, though short on details. What does > that mean, really. maintain Debian? (Doing work for an upstream > program may not count as maintaining Debian) (Please note that I am taking the opportunity to write a few thoughts, I am not impling that you said something that you didn't!) Neal really is alreaddy maintaining Debian: he is one of the most active members of the GNU/Hurd port; as such he does a lot of work: apart from helping out ppl in the mailing list (granted, one doesn't need to be a maintainer to do that) he has his hands full with the porting, changing, tweaking and overall hacking necessary to make things happen with GNU/Hurd. He doesn't promise much, but he delivers (i.e. as opposed to me that pledged myself for doing a task and I'm taking my time delivering it - altought I will :) ). As such, he not only does work for upstream, he actually helps things getting to work with Debian GNU/Hurd... that counts as maintaining Debian, at least to me. I even disagree with Neal when he says that he doesn't need an account: he prolly does, if for nothing else to do NMU of ports. > > Neal> I am not interested in a Debian account: do not give me one; I > Neal> could care less. What I am interested in is having a voice in > Neal> the voting etc. (as outlined in a previous message). > > Genreally, those who work, vote. And remember, there needs to > be a way of demonstrating the difference between a non-packaging > worker and a hacker wannabee who wants to impress his friends with > his Debian membership. Well, I know you know thins, but Neil works :) Note that I agrre with waht you say: if we aplly this criteria blindlessly then there would prolly be thousands of ppl being Debian workers, if not only because of the free mail. The poinst where I understand Neil, and I think you will agree with me, is that his view on being 'officially' a Debian worked is correct, because only that way he has a vote on things. > > Before people jump all over me: I am not opposed to having > non-maintainer developers; (quite the contrary), I am merely pointing > out that there are issues that need be addressed. > Indeed, and this one isn't an easy one... on one hand I agree with a closer look on applicants packages before admitance, but on the other hand there are ppl that should be Debian members without requiring packaging checking... best regards, fsm -- Frederico S. Muñoz GNU http://www.gnu.org fsmunoz@sdf.lonestar.org Debian http://www.debian.org http://sdf.lonestar.org - SDF Public Access Unix Systems
Attachment:
pgp2E_JCiBIkP.pgp
Description: PGP signature