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

Re: Work-needing packages report for Jul 11, 2003

On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 11:09:05AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> >And nothing stated here invalidates my statements in any way.  If
> >sponsorship isn't viewed as any kind of a hinderance for normal
> >applicants then there is no need for accelerated or special treatment
> >for those working on select packages.
> Work requiring CVS access is made more awkward without developer
> status, as is work requiring access to the random architecture boxes.

So, there are times that working through a sponsor is a hinderance and
burnden.  However, rather than addressing the real problem (everyones
wait time for DAM approval), special case kludges were put in place that
only serve to piss off those that are then made second class citizens by

This kludge of accelerating special case applicants seems very different
from most DDs approach to policy or pretty much anything else.  From the
posts I've seen on this list, a number of DDs are normally appossed to
any kludge fix or workaround.  Yet, here is a rather significant kludge
in place.

Jamin W. Collins

Reply to: