Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On 2006/04/05, at 20:53, Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 13:14, JC Helary wrote:
I am not sure what point you are trying to make ?
The point I'm trying to make is that it seems like translators are
for the mountain to come to them (change procedures, make entry
It does not work like that: you have to go to the mountain.
There is no need to change any procedure. Only to clarify the wording of
So that the text does not unnecessarily discriminate between
maintaining packages and contributing in other forms.
Such non-discrimination is hinted in the text itself and in the
application steps. It is only that the document is not worded in a
way that present the necessary information the right way.
Besides, the systematic use of "developer" is also confusing and to
clarify things should be replaced my "member" as is also hinted in
the same document.
I have no doubt that a rewording of the document would clarify a lot
of (non) issues and help members as well as other contributors to see
what the structure of the project really is.
What I mean is that as there are currently no pure "translation DDs",
there is no need to differentiate between "rights". It would only
_potentially_ become a problem when there are more than a few people
accepted as DD who do not have formally proven skills in packaging.
Considering the above status, I don't see how having pure translators
or pure documentation writers could be considered a "problem".
People who need upload rights because their contribution pattern
requires upload right must have upload rights when deemed responsible
People who have no need for upload rights _and_ who never intend to
do anything related to packaging should not be discrinated against
and should not be given upload rights since their contribution
pattern does not require so.
There are provisions for different skill tests and from that should
follow different access to different tools.