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

Re: FTP Team -- call for volunteers



Hello Neil,

On Sat 14 Mar 2020 at 09:18PM +00, Neil McGovern wrote:

> Hi debian-project and ftpmaster folks,

CCing ftpmaster@.

> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 01:37:59PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>>   - cope well with flames in response to your decisions
>
>>   - after training, comfortable with being on the other end of the
>>     ftpmaster@ alias, which receives a huge volume of
>>     not-always-pleasant messages daily.
>
> I hope I am not the only one to be deeply concerned that this should be
> a requirement on volunteers. For me, it is absolutely unacceptable that
> people should put up with unplesentness or flames that come from doing a
> difficult job. Putting this in the requirements is, for me, a failure of
> the project.
>
> Sean: do you have any ideas on how we can reduce this aspect of the
> valuable work that ftpmasters do? Do you have some (anonymised) examples
> of the areas of abuse that you receive perhaps?

The FTP Team has a robust understanding of (a) what the DFSG requires,
and (b) what is required to ensure we're complying with the terms of
common free licenses.  A good example of (a) is ensuring that *all*
preferred forms for modification are included in source packages, and a
good example of (b) is [1].

Not everyone in the project agrees with the FTP Team on these sorts of
issues.  Further, there are not enough people processing NEW, so
packages sometimes stay there for a long time.  Put these two things
together, and you can see why people might be more likely to respond in
a way that's less than ideal when their uploads are rejected from NEW.

Thus, one way to improve things would be to have more people processing
NEW, such that there is less frustration all round -- which is what I'm
trying to achieve by supervising a batch of new trainees :)

[1]  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2018/10/msg00004.html

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: