Re: [nm-admin] Identification step in the current scheme (Re: Fear the new maintainer process)
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:55:50AM -0500, An Thi-Nguyen Le wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 03:42:51PM +0100, Mark Brown typed:
> } On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 02:32:01PM +0000, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> } > about the difficulties of providing "adequate" identification. I find the
> } > technical argument (the applicant does not have access to scanners,
> } > etc...) to be as weak, because it declares a lack of "connectedness" with
> } > the "technological" society they wish to enter. This may sound harsh, but
> } > then again, Debian isn't a life-raft where every living, breathing,
> }
> } It depends on what sort of stuff you do. Unless you actually want to
> } scan in images there's no reason to have a scanner. Computers, net
> } connections - these things we can expect people to have access to.
> } Scanners just aren't so generally useful and it's entirely reasonable to
> } expect that someone doesn't own one and doesn't know anyone that does.
>
> Wouldn't libraries and other such places usually have scanners for public
> access (or maybe, if they're clueless or harassed libraries, free access
> + fee)? (Not that I'm in any position to ascertain an accurate average
> sampling rate for scanners per square mile as I live on a university
> campus.)
Whether or not aspiring maintainers have access to a scanner is not the
issue here.
What is the issue is if should applicants, who *already*, have their
public key signed by another Debian developer be accepted *without*
them supplying a photograph.
Dale wants us to not trust our fellow developers. Dale would seem to
want to dismantle the Debian web of trust.
Anand
Reply to: