Re: Initial Contact
Matthias Urlichs <smurf@noris.de> wrote:
> Having a couple of designated people who co-ACK the AM's report might
> help, or it might not. That's the call of the DAM.
Indeed. Are there any such people at present?
> This mail is CC: da-manager@d.o. Maybe James or Martin can comment on what
> would be helpful / needed / whatever to speed up their part of the
> process.
I'm not sure that speed is the only part of this. I think the raw
statistics published on NM acceptance are depressing reading, sure,
but they could happen. What is not nice is the inaccurate feedback
being given during the process. This leads to false hope being raised
and other such nasties. So far, we have found three bits:--
1. "DAM to approve account" may mean "Application to be evaluated"
2. "Applicants should be quiet" vs "Applicants should be noisy"
-- which is true? Either? Neither?
3. "People who fix bugs and package should become DD" vs "We don't care
whether people who fix bugs and package become DD" -- which?
The "obvious" solutions to this seem to be:--
1. Add another element to the status tracker. Only really works if
there are evaluators as mentioned above who can tick it off when
it's done, I suspect.
2. Put guidance on this point in the NM guide.
3. This needs clarifying on the join page, the developer reference and
in the minds of current DDs, it seems. What is the right answer?
Just reread the lovely phrase "if you are well-prepared, you can save a
lot of time later on" about the NM process. Hrm. ;-)
MJR
Reply to: