Re: Misc web page changes, possible breakage

[Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>]

>   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).

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with this.

>   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.

Sounds like it would be good for Martin or James to chime in before we
get too much further then.

>   > 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).

Oops... sorry... I got the wrong Joey.  Thanks for the correction.

>   > 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.

Makes sense, thanks.

-- 
Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>
http://www.ql.org/q/