Re: AM reports
[ Please don't Cc da-manager@, I read the list and this kind of drivel
doesn't belong in the da-manager@ archives ]
tony mancill <tony@mancill.com> writes:
> This requirement seems to stem from the email below, which occurred
> almost a month after I submitted this applicant's application.
Err, it's always been there, I've simply never pulled you (or some
others) up on it until recently[1]. It's quite simple, I need to
personally assess an applicants' suitability; logs of AM<->Applicant
conversations make that assessment _and_ my assessment of AM's much
easier[2].
> And in any event, this smells like "we trust some Debian developers
> more than others."
Umm, duh? How is that in any way a surprise? Remember that not only
can any developer (whatever his history in or out of the project) can
become an AM but also any _applicant_ can become an AM too.
I'm sorry if you honestly think that I should just blindly accept any
AMs report and go and create the accounts like a good little DAM, but
that's happening just as soon as we give root on *.debian.org to all
developers (which logically follows for anyone in the "trust all
Debian developers equally" camp, no?), i.e. over my dead or
non-contributing body.
> the status is: I don't have logs for this application because I
> didn't know that they were a requirement at the time of submission.
>
> What to do?
Tell me. (Clearly, already done in this case).
--
James
[1] For various reasons... e.g. I talked to Jordi WRT P&P on IRC, I
know Flo in real life and already knew P&P wasn't a problem, etc.
There is also the trade off between chasing AMs to get better reports
out of them, or pushing on and processing the applicants whose AMs
have sent in good reports. I'll choose the latter most of the time
for all the wrong reasons.
[2] This is an important point... by reading the logs of the AM
A.N.Other, I build up an assesment of the AM as well as the applicants
he's processing. When A.N.Other then meets an applicant in RL rather
than online and has no logs to show me, I can decide (on the basis of
the previous logs) whether or not the AMs word is sufficent for me.
Reply to: