Hi Jamin! On 2004-03-15 12:29 -0700, Jamin W. Collins wrote: > In preparing my T&S e-mail for Maz Vozeler, I noticed that some of the > items in the template go into much more detail than the questions on my > own T&S e-mail during my processing. I also altered some T&S question and also created new ones for the applicants I process. It may be more effort but they actually thanked me for that because it 1) prepares them better for the "tough reality" :-) and 2) may show the Comitee and DAM better that the applicant is mature. > While I understand that a good deal of what is asked and what isn't > is currently up to the AM to decide, would it not be better to > standardize a bit on what is and isn't asked? IMHO the templates can be regarded as an inofficial standard; tests should not be weaker than them; however, I don't think that a little freedom on the AM's side hurts. E.g. Martin Michlmayr said that he won't put my additional tasks (package correction, RC bug fixing, writing actual manpage for a program that does not already have one, and applicant-specific ones) into the official templates; however, he appreciates them. > I somewhat ashamed to say that I don't know if I could answer some > of the questions on the template without research. Me neither. Although I did e. g. the bad licences stuff a handful of times now, I always forget some clumsy details. Also I don't know by heart the nifty details of Emacs mode creation. But personally I'm not ashamed of that. I would be ashamed if I could not answer the questions/solve the excercises at all, but life is about "knowing where it is written", isn't it? Have a nice day! Martin -- Martin Pitt Debian GNU/Linux Developer martin@piware.de mpitt@debian.org http://www.piware.de http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature