Re: RFC: Merging sponsoring system with wnpp
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Colin,
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:04:35PM -0500, Joe Nahmias wrote:
> > I just had a brainstorm about the sponsorship process that I wanted to
> > share for comment.
> >
> > What if we add a new type to the wnpp package 'RFS' = Ready/Request
> > For Sponsorship?
>
> This has come up before. I'm told, though, that the new-maintainer
> people are interested in integrating sponsorship into their database
> instead, so that they can more easily feed sponsorship data into the
> process of deciding whether applicants should be accepted. This would
> probably work better than trying to fit it into WNPP, I feel.
I disagree. I feel that it dovetails nicely with the current functions
of WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) and that there is a
natural progression in WNPP from [RFA/O/RFP to] ITP to RFS; a Package
that is ready for sponsorship is Prospective in that it is not in Debian
yet, and Needs the sponsor to do the Work of checking and uploading. As
I see it, the two main functions of WNPP are:
1) Getting packages into Debian (RFP, ITP)
2) Giving maintainers a place to pass off packages (O, RFA)
I think that the proposed RFS fits very nicely with the above:
a) It is a request to get a completed pkg into Debian.
b) It is a mechanism for the sponsoree to pass pkgs to DDs.
I understand that the nm people have a vested interest in the
sponsorship process, but I think that the relevant information can be
extracted rather easily through the BTS (although, you, as a BTS admin,
are probably better equipped to speak to this than I).
I also think that integrating the sponsorship system with nm will have
certain drawbacks:
0) I don't think it will be advertised as well as the WNPP list is.
1) I think that non-DDs may want to have a package sponsored without
needing/wanting to go through the nm process (especially considering the
length of time needed, etc...)
2) Sponsors may not want to go through the additional overhead of
coordinating with the front-desk, or whatever is decided.
3) Time-to-market: I believe the BTS-admins can implement this (better)
solution in a more expedient manner, than the nm people can decide on
what to do and how to do it (let alone implementing).
In short, I believe that integration with WNPP is the right thing to do
(technically/socially?) and will have the greatest positive impact on
both non-DDs and Debian as a whole.
Joe Nahmias, DD wannabe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+bMuuKl23+OYWEqURAmceAJ4ggnYMaS1IXkX73er8z83FWCESiQCdGTTE
rvi9B3GbbddSw93GY1DI/1w=
=V+mL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: