Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted.
David Weinehall <email@example.com> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 01:16:44PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:23:37 +0100, David Weinehall <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > wrote:
> > >Yes, the DAM may seem to be an ignorant, paranoid person, but it's his
> > >bloody job to be paranoid, and honestly, tell me anyone who wouldn't
> > >ignore people asking for (what may at the moment be perceived as)
> > >the millionth time whether they will be accepted soon ("Mom, are we
> > >there yet? Mom, are we there yet? Mom, are we there yet? Mom, are we
> > >there yet? Mom, are we there yet?"...)
> > >
> > >Even if every applicant only asks once or twice, it soon becomes quite
> > >a lot of questions, especially if these persons also question the DAM's
> > >authority on public mailinglists.
> > Answering queries would be a good idea. If I had received in Februar
> > 2001 the information that it would take at least two more months, I'd
> > have refrained from asking in March.
> Obviously, while I realise that people would prefer to get an answer out
> of the DAM directly (since he is responsible for accepting/rejecting), I
> think that the AM's should make it clear to the applicants that any and
> all inquiries wrt to their status should be made through their AM's.
I did ask my AM and he had no idea why I was stuck. No reply from
James as to why. If its forbidden for NMs to talk to James that realy
should be stated.
It took an intervention from Martin (frontdesk hat afaik) to get
things going again, Martin putting me under observation for 3 month so
he could make up his own mind and then recommend to the DAM.
Now I got told by James that they (James and Martin) were concerned
about my "inactivity" leading up to the intervention.