Eray Ozkural <erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr> wrote: > > Dear fellow debian hackers and everybody related to new maintainer process, > > I am still waiting for a debian account, it has been more than 6 months, or > perhaps 7 months since I have been approved by AM now. I have informed the > DAM and my AM of the situation in case they have not been able to check the > current situation on nm.debian.org[*] but I have not received any response > from them. This is the same complaint that surfaces on debian-devel quite often, and not always from Eray. As a counter-example to Eray's, my AM took a month to get to me (I can forgive that). Once he made the initial contact, my account was created within about 5 days. This was in November 2000. I can provide a more recent example of an applicant taking less than 14 days to go from application to account creation during the same time that Eray has been waiting for DAM Approval. This vast difference between the amount of time different applicants spend waiting for DAM approval makes me wonder about the process (hidden from public view) that occurs between AM approval and account creation. So now I have a whole bunch of questions that I'd *really* like to see answers to. 1) What exactly are the details of the process labelled "DAM Approval" on the NM status pages? 2) Why does this process take vastly different amounts of time for different applicants? 3) If something is holding the process up for some applicants, why is there no feedback to those applicants who are waiting? 4) http://www.debian.org/intro/organization says there's just one person who's a member of the DAM group: James Troup. However, http://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint#DAMan says that Martin (Joey) Schulze is also a DAM. Which is correct? 5) Is/Are the DAM(s) simply swamped and catching up on a backlog? 5a) If the answer to 5) is "yes", why aren't there more DAMs? 5b) If the answer to 5) is "yes", how do some applicants skip the queue? 6) If there is no explanation for some applicants being held up on DAM Approval, that implies that the DAM(s) aren't fulfilling their responsibilities. How can it be determined whether the DAM(s) really are fulfilling their responsibilities? 6a) Exactly what are the DAM(s) responsibilities? 7) http://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint#DAMan states that the DAM(s) are delegates appointed by the DPL. The position of DAM doesn't seem to be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Exactly what authority is a DAM given when appointed? 8) If it is determined that the DAM(s) are not fulfilling their responsibilities or are overstepping or abusing their authority, what further steps should be taken? 8a) Are there actions to take that are less drastic than the DPL replacing the DAM(s)? 9) If the purpose of the DPL delegating account creation is "to avoid concentration of power, particularly over membership as a Developer, in the hands of the Project Leader" (Debian Constitution, section 8.1), shouldn't there be more than one person (or maybe even more than two) with that power? 9a) Since the position of DAM seems to be quite powerful, should it be formally recognised and defined in the Constitution? Notes: This message is not intended to be inflammatory, merely a request for further information. Inflammatory responses will be either deleted or picked apart and ridiculed, depending on their quality and my mood. Explanations, constructive comments and reasoned arguments are most welcome. Pointers to places where I can find more information are also welcome. -- Sam Couter | Internet Engineer | http://www.topic.com.au/ sam@topic.com.au | tSA Consulting | OpenPGP key ID: DE89C75C, available on key servers OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
Attachment:
pgpsZJGF1Ng6X.pgp
Description: PGP signature