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

Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006

On Thursday 06 April 2006 15:29, JC Helary wrote:
> Nobody's saying that you are going to stop being a developer. You can
> be proud of what you do being a developer. You've earned that status.
> But requiring people who are not software developers to understand
> they suddenly have become developers because Debian is special is a
> little far fetched.

> The bug is in the relation between "from new maintainer->to
> developer" and the corollary "other contributors don't _need_ to
> become developers".

I really don't think that the current terminology is gonna be a problem IF 
the NM-page make it clear that the process is open to non-package 

Now obviously the current current NM-corner doesn't do a good enough job of 
that, which is a reason to work on rewording it so the page does make clear 
that the process _is_ open to non-package-maintainers (something that's 
being worked on elsewhere in this thread)

I think it should be apperant at this point that changing the terminology 
from 'New Maintainer' and 'Debian Developer' to something else is 
controversial enough that we're not likely to generate a consensus on it 
any time soon. So could we please focus on the changes we can get consensus 

Also even if -from an outsiders perspective- the jargon used is quirky and 
strange. I have to wonder:
if one is not even willing to look at the jargon used by the project from 
the projects point of view. Then why on earth would one be applying to 
NM-process in the first place? And how on earth would one expect to pass 
the philosyphy and procedures part of the process?
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
    format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)

Attachment: pgp4nCPnfi8Tq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: