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

Re: another reason why requiring NMs to be sponsored is a bad idea



On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 11:25:08AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Gergely" == Gergely Nagy <algernon@debian.org> writes:
> 
>     >> No, we don't. It's normal, but not required. The NM process
>     >> doesn't even require a person to maintain any packages,
>     >> although I'm not aware of anybody who passed it in another
>     >> manner (and I'd be surprised if anybody did).
> 
>     Gergely> I do, and not only one.
> 
> I'd hope that if you and the NM cannot agree on a sponsor you give the
> applicant a chance to pick another AM.

Gergely was my full-time sponsor as an AM, until I got to packages such
as KDE; I sought another sponsor with more time, more bandwidth, and a
faster machine. ;)

But as a sponsor, he was damn good - my packages came out 100% less
buggy than they went in.

-- 
Daniel Stone						    <daniel@sfarc.net>
<rcw> liiwi: printk("CPU0 on fire\n");

Attachment: pgpE_SrZ_6mXj.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: