> On 16.01.2012 23:57, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: >> For example, that was not "a very first upload" (of mod_rpaf) for me. >> But next time I should convince new sponsor and so on. > > That's unfortunate, but this happens. I'm sorry for you, and I made > similar experiences. It's just too common to be "the default route". > I know what you mean. I am a Debian Maintainer by myself and I'm in the > same situation as you are. Several Debian developers are perhaps quite > annoyed by me as well, as I was complaining a lot about the sponsor > situation in Debian in the past. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/05/msg00753.html This one? > But please understand, the Debian Maintainer status does not guarantee > you privileged access to Debian archives just because you have been > advocated to such a role. It only means you went through a simple > procedure where someone confirmed you have some skills and you deserve > to work a bit more autonomously. Let's see. I've a bunch of apache2 modules, where DMUA already allowed. Do you think it's a good idea to confirm my skill again just for packaging a new module (and in comparison, a very simple one)? The same is valid for php-memcached. Second, every DD has own standards of "the simple procedure". Does it make sense to go through NM "Tasks and Skills" process every time you do some packaging work for Debian? Probably, DD familar with me, can more easily set DMUA header (again, that is my expirience). It is not a good idea to abuse people you know (they may be not interested in this particular pice of software, after all). So, you have dilemma: annoy people in private or ask for upload in d-m@l.d.o and start the game again. > However, I am sure one ore two more uploads of your package will change > the situation again for you. I don't think so.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature