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

Re: About NM and Next Release



Craig Dickson <crdic@pacbell.net> writes:

> Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute.
> 
> For meaningful values of "contribute", sure. But being a project member
> with a d.o account is not essential to contributing, and its arguable
> how significant a "contribution" it is to just maintain a few packages
> when Debian is so big already (unless they're important packages, in
> which case it seems you are more likely to get through the NM process
> quickly). I don't deny that the sponsorship requirement for

How does a package become important? All the important stuf has been
in debian for years. I doubt any NM can come up with a new package
where people say: "Gosh, if we wouldn't have that we would be screwed."

> non-developers is annoying, but if worse comes to worst, you can simply
> set up your own repository and Bugzilla somewhere and publicize its
> location for the benefit of those users who want your packages. If you
> don't have the bandwidth or full-time connection or hosting arrangements
> to do such a thing, well, gee. Life is hard, isn' t it.
> 
> >     No, I am pointing out that it appears that Debian, on the whole,
> > needs an attitude readjustment. On the one hand you have d.o people
> > blasting people for not contributing and on the other you have d.o
> > people discouraging people from contributing. You cannot have it both
> > ways. Either you accept the contributions that come or you stop
> > blasting people because they don't contribute.
> 
> The NM process, viewed from the outside (and I'm on the outside too),
> looks like quite a mess. I dislike the obvious dishonesty of the project
> having a documented process for new maintainers, important aspects of
> which are ignored by the people responsible for running it. That this is
> excused by various other project members is rather sad.

The process seems fine to me in theory. It works fine with the AM and
I guess with Advocates too (don't have one, my NM application
predates them, which in itself says something).

The most complains come from the "Waiting for DAM" stage. Its sound in
theory but its eigther not done at all for long streches of time (only
3 times in the last 8 month from the look of the graph posted earlier)
or lacks the feedback that work is actually done and things are
progressing.

> If the Debian project and its leadership are unwilling to require (and
> enforce the requirement) that the DAM follow the NM procedure as
> written, including formally rejecting people if they're not going to be
> approved, then the documentation should be updated to reflect this. At
> least it would be honest, whatever else one might say about it, to say
> openly that unacceptable applicants will be ignored until they go away.
> 
> Craig

MfG
        Goswin



Reply to: