Re: Misc web page changes, possible breakage
Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 05:00:34PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
>> The only disadvantage I see is that this seems to necessitate an
>> immediate action on an application. Occasionally applicants are left
>> for a while at the DAM stage for reasons like "they haven't done much
>> for Debian recently", etc. There may be legitimate reasons to put off
>> a decision, and that becomes difficult in this situation.
>
> I'd say that the group would then come to a consensus about putting the
> applicant on hold. It doesn't even seem like a disadvantage, just another
> possible end-point for the discussion -- "yes, no, or hang on a sec".
>
> I like Brian's plan better than the one I tentatively had (three AMs
> approve, no explicit disapprovals), because it includes any and all AMs who
> are interested in that part of the process (exactly as per debian-legal).
> And if nobody is interested (either in the process or in a particular
> application) then the process just devolves to what we have now -- FD and
> DAM work something out between them. But with the AM group doing most of
> the heavy lifting, I would presume that the truly problematic cases that
> nobody wants to touch can be isolated for manual DAM handling, and he won't
> have to spend as much time on the routine cases.
>
> This whole thing, though, pre-supposes that elmo is actually willing to
> participate in/approve of this process. If all the AMs get together and
> come up with a good consensus, but then elmo does exactly what he does now
> and reviews every case by hand with a very fine mesh, then we're gaining
> nothing.
We would still gain from AM's working together more. By reviewing each
other's reports, we can verify all questions have been given complete
answers, and that we hold each applicant to approximately the same
standards. Currently, with each AM acting independently, we have
greater variation--some AM's are stricter than others, some focus on
different things, etc. Even if elmo still proceeds exactly the same as
before, he would still benefit indirectly from reports being more
consistent and hopefully more thorough.
--
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!
Reply to: