Re: another reason why requiring NMs to be sponsored is a bad idea
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:36:38AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:03:48AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> > Does we require NM's to be sponsored for a while before letting them
> > be full developers. That is new to me.
>
> Yes, we do.
No, we don't. It's normal, but not required. The NM process doesn't
even require a person to maintain any packages, although I'm not aware
of anybody who passed it in another manner (and I'd be surprised if
anybody did). The only "required" thing is that the applicant
demonstrate competance.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
Reply to: