On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 11:01:48PM -0500, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > I'm curious about whether we have any statistics about how many > applications historically are approved by AM and Front Desk but > rejected by the DAM. I'm pretty sure it's not many. I can only think of two actual rejections by the DAM. DAM sometimes asks for go-arounds, but they're not rejections as such, just requests for clarification. That reminds me of a point that I wanted to bring up previously but didn't. In previous messages on the topic of DAM-level rejections, I've gotten the distinct impression that James considers himself the final "gatekeeper" of who gets into Debian. For instance, the process specified in http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2003/10/msg00001.html includes the words "not going to become developers (on my watch), period." (in regard to ultimate rejections at the DAM stage). As per James' delegated power from the DPL, he apparently has the right to take this stance. So we have to talk to Martin on two fronts -- as a senior member of the NM process (in the role of Front Desk) and the delegator of the authority of the DAM. Obviously James needs to have a say in this whole thing as well if we're to get anywhere without pissing him off mightily. > Also, the information on the NM site mentions that Joey Hess serves as Martin "Joey" Schulze acts as backup according to http://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint (down the bottom). > backup DAM. What does this actually mean? Do they both have the > authority to do this, or is one only supposed to step in when > specifically asked? I recall reading that the backup DAM has specifically stated that he will *only* step in to do the DAM job (heh) if James is incapable of performing the job -- he will not be used to route around percieved problems in the way James does the job. I don't think is a bad idea under the circumstances. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature