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

Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

On 00-12-17 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> >...
> > > > > suggests to the NM team that he should become a Debian account. The NM
> > > > > team (perhaps the current NM-Committee plus other interested Debian
> > > > > developers) then looks critical at the work of the applicant, makes a
> > > > > "Philosophy and Procedures" check,... and discusses and decides whether
> > > > > the applicant will be a valuable gain for the project.
> >
> > Well, this would still mean that you either need a list of predfined
> > criteria, which will be a bad thing and also create new problems. Or you
> > need to depend on the NM-comittee and believe that they make the right
> > decisions. I think this is a part of the current NM process that needs
> > no change as it's working fine. Only a bit more sponsorship and a bit

> The current system is: Only two people (the NM of the applicant and the
> DAM) decide whether an applicant gets his account. That's different from a
> NM-comittee with more people that makes a decision.

Well, but then you need again some formal criteria, what qualification
someone needs to have to become a NM-comittee or you will have the same
situation as currently only with a high number of people involved.

> > more careful task&skill test would be helpful.

> Yes, and the main point of my proposal is: An applicant doesn't get his
> account before he had worked some months for Debian. This lets us judge on
> his whole work (e.g. his knowledge about packaging, how he handles
> bugs,...).

I think we should define that he has to work several months for Debian.
Maybe he has already done a lot in the past or is involved in a lot of
software projects? Does he still need to work for debian some months to
qualifiy himself? We should make this too formal, but more flexibel to
react on the qualifications that an NM can show, when he is applying.

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

Attachment: pgpWAIB5_hwAS.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: