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

Re: (long reply) Re: NM saga (all of it - Joey, this means you)

On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 07:39:05PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Just so everyone is on the same page here, DAM effectively gives root to
> every debian.org computer, and some others too.

There is no technical need for that, so it can and should be adressed, so
this technical limitation doesn't stand in the way any more.
> In fact, historically, 'DAM' is a subset of Debian-Admin, and is probably
> the highest bureaucratic post any developer can hold. IMHO it cannot be an
> elected position.

We can't directly vote delegates in their office, only the project leader is
allowed to do that. It is not unreasonable to interpret the constitution
that we can vote delegates out of their office. The decision to
make someone a delegate can be put on hold and overridden following the
procedure in 4.2. Nowhere it is said that overriding the decision has to
happen within some time frame after the decision was made.
However, this should probably be discussed in another thread (if at all. I
would rather not have another "how should the constitution be interpreted"
thread right now).

> It is conceivable to create a new class of people who are not DAM but, are
> at the end of the new-maintainer pipe. These folks would not have root,
> just the ability to create accounts. But just building, securing and
> testing the software to do that would take months. 

That's a good idea. Time is not so important, as long as this goal is
really aimed for. Compared to the time it takes a new maintainer to become a
developer, a couple of months is not too much.


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org    marcus@gnu.org

Reply to: