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

NM Queue: Policy Discussion

Ok, there's been a hell of a lot of flaming going on concerning the NM
queue lately. As I'm in the queue, I find reading a lot of the posts
rather interesting (nothing like a good flamefest!), but it's gone on long
enough, hows about we makes it productive, see?

So how about an ordered logical discussion on the main points and how to
fix the system if there is a problem?

*waves his magic talisman against trolls and flames*

Ok folks, it's like this. Debian is democratic, and needs clear rules and
transparent procedures to remain so. For the good of the project, we need
the DAMs to follow a clear set of rules and procedures without having them
go off acting as self-appointed axmen thinking they can impose new rules
and regulations beyond what the written procedures are.

So first off, is there a problem? Is there a viable threat to Debian from
these unnamed bugaboos who want to infiltrate, disrupt, and exploit
Debian? If so, are the current procedures up to the task of stopping them?
If not, what procedures *would* stop them? What should be the specific
task of the DAM in all of this?

In short, let's:

* Identify the problem, if any
* Suggest procedures or rules to fix the problem, if it exists

Just so you know who I am, I'm currently in the new maintainer queue,
awaiting DAM approval. I don't mind waiting a while for it to be approved,
since I recognize they're volunteers with lives of their own. However, I'd
prefer to not be excluded from the project simply because of a paranoid
DAM acting on his own without the procedures allowing him such leeway.

I'm only maintaining one package right now (VirtualFTPD), and I don't plan
on taking over any more packages until I've got how to do this one down
pat, including bugfixes and code rewrites and so forth.

~Warren Stramiello

Reply to: