Re: NM non-process
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:38:41AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:56:20 -0400
> Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote:
> > And neither does the fact that some have been there for years indicate
> > anything in particular.
>
> Actually, I think it does. They should either be accepted or rejected
> within x days. x being somewhere below rand(20) * 365. Either they are in,
> rejected, or the application closed because of a lack of interest on the
> developer's part.
rand(3) doesn't take an argument, but if you meant a random integer from 0
through 19, then no applicant has come close to that upper limit of 20
years.
> > You need some familiarity with the process, or else the individual
> > situations of the applicants, in order to claim that their status is
> > unjust.
>
> No, I never said their status was unjust. I said the process appears
> broken. Two completely different statements. I cannot think of any
> conceivable justification for ANY application to be present for years.
> That has nothing to do with just or unjust.
If the applicants are not being treated unjustly, then I do not think that
the process is broken.
--
- mdz
Reply to: