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

Re: Rewording of NM-corner

On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 12:55:55AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Apr 2006, JC Helary wrote:
> > The Debian Project New Member process, is the process of becoming an
> > official Debian Project Member (DPM), also called Debian Developer
> > (DD) for historical purposes.

I would suggest "historical reasons" instead of "historical purposes".  Trying
to imagine what a historical purpose would be makes my think of rewriting
history and so.  That can't be the idea. ;-)

> It's more than that; that's what the constitution refers to Debian
> Developers as, so the NM process needs to use the same terminology.

That is irrelevant IMO.  As has been mentioned before, the constitution is
close to a law.  Laws have their own definitions of normal words, which aren't
always what you'd think they mean.  This is typically the case here as well.

I think both "Debian Developer" and especially "New Maintainer" are terms
which suggest incorrect things (namely that a DD is always a programmer, and
that an NM's job is mostly maintaining packages).

Actually, I'd suggest the constitution gets changed to use better terminology.
But in the mean time, I don't think there's anything wrong with saying DD is a
historical term, which doesn't mean what it suggests.  This is true,
irrespective of where it is used.

Especially in the NM corner, it is important that people understand what is
meant.  We can't assume that they'll understand our jargon.  Therefore I
support the change of using Debian Project Member and New Member, at least in
the NM corner.

Bas Wijnen

I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: