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

Re: long term goals of debian membership



> > Can you define to me the responsibilties?
> > They're not saying "I want to be king Debian package maintainer, but I only
> > want one package". They have their own section, they keep to themselves,
> > they do one thing and do it well, they're not overloaded, they're happy, and
> > will probably ease into more. They shouldn't have to be the GNU Emacs of
> > developers. I just think you're wrong on this, being a Debian maintainer
> > doesn't imply that you _have_ to take up x amount of packages to be
> > effective; you'd probably be most effective on one or two packages.
> 
> Ok, you've gone on for 4 or so emails about this, and it is reallt getting
> annoying because you are harping on "# of packages" as a guideline, when
> it isn't.

Am I really, really lost, or were you flaming the crap out of said 1-package
people earlier?
 
> Being a developer means (in no certain order of priority, and this is my
> personal list):
> 
> - You take part in discussions important to the Project (DPL, policy that
>   you have knowledge of, future directions for the project, etc...).
> 
> - You keep up with policy as it pertains to your package. Meaning you make
>   an active effort to follow policy and not wait for bug reports before
>   you change them.
> 
> - You actively track bug reports on your packages, fix them, close them,
>   reply to them, etc...
> 
> - You try to help out in other areas as time permits, with things like
>   documentation, ports, boot-floppies, installer project, RC bug list,
>   helping other developers who may need advice in your area of expertise.
> 
> This list is by no means complete. The thing is, we cannot know that a
> person will do these things if we give them maintainership quickly, and
> without some sort "credentials" (current activities in the project,
> etc..). If all a developer will ever do is maintain their one package, not
> subscribe to any of the lists for developer discusssion, never "poke his
> head into the project", then they might aswell just use a sponsor.
> 
> Maybe later that developer can decide that they do want to become a
> developer, but I don't think there is any case where developership is
> needed immediately, before doing anything.
> 
> IMO, we need an organized sponsorship program that gives priority to
> packages that are on the QA list (orphaned).
> 
> -- 
>  -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
> /  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
> `  bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org  --  bcollins@linux.com  '
>  `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'



Reply to: