[Bartosz Fenski] > That's example: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2005/07/msg00254.html Wow, that's a disturbing thread! So, some people honestly don't see a problem with someone taking sole responsibility for a package with no ability to hack on its source? At the very least I'd expect it to be common sense of the most basic sort that you need at least one comaintainer qualified to extract, read and write patches. > In sum. Maybe it's time to create additional positions in Debian > project? Maybe something like Packager (with knowledge about Bash > and Debian Policy), Translator (with knowledge about some particular > language and English), Helper (with knowledge about Debian in > general), and finally DEVELOPER which develops software and is able > to fix it if it's broken. Your categories don't really make sense to me. In what situation would a Packager who is not a Developer be useful? Since you'd obviously need a Developer on your maintainer team anyway, would a mere Packager on the same team really be able to contribute meaningfully? (I guess you can take the above as meaning that I'm in favor of requiring "Developers" to know Debian Policy and how to build packages. This stuff isn't rocket science - it's really not much to ask, for people who already hack on free software.) The Helper position seems even more useless to me - I don't understand what a Helper could contribute. Did you intend this one to encompass debian-legal and debian-www? > Developers could be splitted to Python/Perl/C/C++/Java/Mono/and so > on... The overhead of handing out these 'certifications' would far outweigh any advantages I can think of in having them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature