Re: Work-needing packages report for Jul 11, 2003
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:09:39PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 10:12:18AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:37:31PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > yes. if you are just bolting another web gallery or editor onto
> > > debian, that is far less important than if you fix bugs in
> > > debian-installer, debbugs, ipv6 related packages, send in bug
> > > reports and patches, etc.
> > Then again the system is broken. If second class applicants can be
> > expected to work through a sponsor while they wait, so can the
> > applicants working on the above packages.
> Am I to understand that you're arguing the system is broken on the
> grounds that it self-selects to make more efficient use of those
> developers who are focusing on Debian's weaknesses?
No, I'm simply stating that if applicants can be expected to work
through a sponsor (in some cases for upwards of 2 years) and during this
time expected to do just as much (through their sponsor) for Debian as
they would when they are a full DD, then selectively accelerating an
applicant because they are working on one or more select areas is
unnecessary and thus flawed. If this is truly needed then working
through a sponsor must be some kind of a hinderance.
Additionally, if the excessive wait for DAM approval were corrected,
selective processing would become unnecessary anyway.
Jamin W. Collins
To be nobody but yourself when the whole world is trying it's best night
and day to make you everybody else is to fight the hardest battle any
human being will fight. -- E.E. Cummings