On Thursday 06 April 2006 16:38, JC Helary wrote:
> On 2006/04/06, at 23:18, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > 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?
>
> Which is the reason why this whole thread started.
>
> Why is it that active contributors would have to go through all this
> to have a right to vote in the Project Leader's election ?
the only questionable part about the whole NM process for translators as
opposed to package maintainers would be the tasks and skills portion asking
for deep packaging knowledge and related things such as compiling.
I have absolutely no problem with requiring that people who get to vote in
Debian first have to go to a process that examines whether they accept and
understand general Debian philosophy and goals.
That's the same for non-DD package maintainers, they don't get to vote
either, unless they go through NM
--
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:
pgpSwbmRifE_A.pgp
Description: PGP signature