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

Re: task & skills



Hi to all the readers of this mail,

On 00-12-03 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> >...
> > > 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.

> you are right, I didn't contact Dale after the discussion with James and
> Martin. I was under the impression that if the DAM says that it he don't
> understand me his opinion is some kind of a final judgement. I did only

No, the DAM is only there to read the reports from the AM and then
either create the accounts for those people or not. But he's definiately
not the person who makes a final judgement. 

> send my general concerns about the speed some AMs process the applicants
> in http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint-discuss-0011/msg00050.html
> some time ago.

I just looked at the followups to this mail and I have to say that it's
all theoretical discussion without examples or prooves for anything. I
would recommend giving some prooves for your point so that the James or
Martin have something to argue against. You have given a fine example
above at the URL
http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint-discuss-0011/msg00103.html. I
would suggest trying to argue why the task&skill paragraph is not
acceptable and why this increase the workload for the QA-Team. ( I think
Martin has probably no idea how much work QA currently is and how much
work such applicants will generate.)

> Martin is only "an AM", but he has already processed 42 applicants (more
> than 25% of all processed applicants) and if he continues with his speed
> he will process half of all applicants.

And if he continues to accept people like the one described in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint-discuss-0011/msg00103.html I
probably start an open discussion on debian-devel, why we have a
task&skill test and if we still need people trying to take care of QA,
if we shoot ourself in the foot with such applicants. I would recommend
a better task&skill test for applicants which is more oriented toward
the quality of the packages, that they produce. 

> Sorry that I didn't try to contact all people I should have contacted. I
> was a bit frustrated after the discussion and did only think of it again
> after I saw earlier in this thread that other AMs have the same
> problems/concerns I have. It might be I did some mistakes.

I think that this is a problem that we should discuss as open as
possible, to get all involved parties informed. I support the opinion of
Adrian, that we need a stronger quality check for applicants.

> One important thing: Don't let us forget our main goal: Debian.
> I have perhaps more a QA view when I think of such things than other
> people. It isn't important who of us is right or wrong. Let's discuss
> together what's best for Debian as a whole.

Agreed. :)

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

Attachment: pgpd2uDVaNZHp.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: