[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: task & skills


sorry to intercept here. I'm not subscribed to debian-newmaint-admin but
to debian-qa, so please send a copy of your answer to this mailing-list.

On 00-12-03 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> [Cc to debian-qa because this mail explains why I'll quit Debian QA]

> On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Gergely Risko wrote:

> >...
> > > We are talking about prospective maintainers, right?
> > >
> > > These are people who care enough about Debian to actually bother to
> > > apply to be a maintainer so they can help make the distribution
> > > better for themselves (and hopefully in addition others).
> > >
> > > And you are supporting the point of view that rejecting them will
> > > increase our numbers? Sorry I don't follow the logic.
> >
> > I said only, that I will teach my applicants to be the best maintainer,
> > in this way the approve time will be longer, but the bug fixing time woll
> > be less, because we will got fewer bugs with better new maintainers.
> > In this way our numbvers will be increased.
> > But I decided now, that I won't accept more applicants, because they
> > think that I'm the most strict AM, and I do it because I'm evil, or I don't
> > want to approve them. Other AMs approving most of the applicants in one day!
> > I won't declare me as an evil AM, I will go back to adopting, and
> > debianize new packages, and leave the work of the new applicants to you.
> > But an ask to James, please only approve applicants, who got them
> > tasks and skills test really done, now when I adopted one or two
> > packages, I saw a lot of bugs (eg build-depends) in the pacakges which
> > are in thje archive. I don't want to see more, please!

> I have the same problem. I had a discusion with Martin Michlmayr and James
> Troup about the "Tasks and Skills" in IRC some days ago because I'm also
> of the opinion that someone who wants to maintain Debian packages needs to
> show that he can produce quality package. I have a bad conscience when I

I absolutely agree with you on this part. 

> do either use the high standards I want to use for my applicants and they
> see that others with lower skills are already accepted by other AMs or
> when I do suggest that they should become members of Debian before I do
> really think they are ready. When I see that a package with missing build
> dependencies (except debhelper) that has in debian/copyright a "Copyright:
> not yet known" and 2 other bugs is enough to become a Debian maintainer
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint-discuss-0011/msg00103.html) I
> can't see any quality standards that are needed.

Have you ever mailed about this to the AMs and the NM-Frontdesk
(especially Dale) and told them your concerns to discuss this out and
find a better solution? If not, I definitely recommend doing so, before
blaiming here the whole NM-process. (And yes, I know what I say, because
I already had some things to discuss about the NM-process with Dale and
so I know that you can discuss with him things). If yes, then this
behaviour of some AMs should be publically discussed even if it's needed
on debian-project. But just moaning here on to list where not many
people see it, won't help improve the situation. 

> After the discussion where James and Martin totally disagreed with me I
> decided I'll stop being an AM after I'll have processed my two applicants.

Just because the person creating accounts and and AM have a different
view, you just quit without talking with the head of the NM process?
Sorry to say, but this is idiotic. James has not more influence on the
NM process then you. So if you want to see some changes, then you are
free to contact Dale and convince him.

> > > Please demonstrate a correlation between new maintainer-ness and
> > > buggy packages. If there is one I could probably accept that
> > > more checking of the tasks and skills would need to be done.
> >
> > ok, I can't demostrate it, because the developers are also upload
> > buggy packages, and this slows down the way of good packages to archive.
> > I only say that my 38 applicant will be thought to be a good
> > maintainer, and after that I won't accept new applicants.
> >...

> I will quit Debian QA because there will be many more bugs with several
> hundred new maintainers if noone looks if they can produce quality
> packages and I don't want to spend my spare time I have for Debian on this
> extra work.

Well, I'm a bit disappointed to see you leaving here, but if this is
really your decision, then I agree. But from judging from your comments
above, Dale has never been told about this lazy AMs that don't apply
high debian standards to their applicants. If this is not right, I would
like to know what Dale said. 

> Another problem if you don't look at the quality of the packages and how a
> new maintainer handles bugs: You can't control someone who has a Debian
> account. He can ignore bugs and he can ignore NMUs (remember the
> discussion about kaffe starting in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-0008/msg02567.html ...). That makes
> the QA work much more frustrating.

Well, I can tell you, that if I see some really lazy Developers in the
future, I will complaining about them, even on -devel if it's needed. As
I sometimes have said: We need way to deal with those lazy developers,
that also ignore mails. And if there's no way to get them motivated to
do more for debian, then I vote for excluding them.

          Debian Developer and Quality Assurance Team Member
    1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16  63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853

Attachment: pgpjHZXvXBKmc.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: