On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 02:31:54PM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
> I'm in NM to, I can't say yet if it's so complicated because i'm still
> waiting for an AM. What i do not really understand is the principe of NM
> - some years ago you could become a DD in some weeks and today in some
> years.
Small organisations work different from large ones. Also, if it was different
then, that could be because it was wrong. What I mean to say is that a
comparison with previous moments on only one aspect (how long does it take to
become a member) does not make sense.
> Why can't it be easier to become a DD, i mean: if someone abuses
> his privileges they still can be deleted, right?
Yes, but not easily. There's a procedure for it (see the constitution), but
that takes months, at least. Only when clearly violating the DMUP is the
procedure fast, and I don't think that that happens often (but I don't know,
since the procedure mostly involves debian-private, and I'm not a DD so I
can't read that).
And I think this is a very good thing. If a DD can be revoked access to all
the things for which he needs the membership at any time for essentially no
reason, then DDs aren't going to depend on those features. And that means you
can as well drop the whole concept of "DD", and change it into "allowed to
upload". And even then it may scare away people we do want in the project.
Debian depends on being a community where people feel part of it. One thing
that is essential for this is that they can trust it. Making it easier to get
"fired" makes people feel uncomfortable, and they will go looking for other
jobs "just in case". I don't think we want to stimulate that.
> The applicant should search an advocate (like it is now) and this has to
> recommend him. Then the DAM has to contact the applicant directly and
> check his work, if he did enough work, and well work. If the applicant
> did well work he should get a temporary "Junior Developer" status (may
> upload packages himself, not yet a access to other privileges of a DD).
> And after 6 months, if the applicant did well work and no abuse, he gets
> the "normal" DD status.
Debian so far made the principle choice of "every DD is equal (except a very
limited group, who are elected and/or appointed into certain positions)".
Your suggestion would change that. It is worth thinking about, I think. But
it is also important to understand what it means. I think being a DD means to
the outside world that the project trusts you. We can't add an arbitrary
level of complexity, because the people will not understand ("So you're a
grade 5.3f DD. Does that mean I can trust code when it's signed by you?")
And I must say, I don't really see the problem. Being a DD makes doing things
a little bit easier, but come on, it isn't that hard to do Debian work without
it!
> I think it's wrong to do this "tests" during the current NM process,
> because the only real test is real work - grant the applicant some
> rights and he has to show what he can really do.
First of all, the applicant has lots of rights. They can build a package, fix
bugs, submit bugs, write documentation, translate texts, all without being a
DD. The only thing you need to be a DD for is uploading, and you can use
sponsors as long as you're not a DD. As I see it, complaining that it takes
so long will mostly come from people who want the "status". I don't think
it's wrong to want the status. But if it's the only thing you want, I think
you shouldn't get it. Being a DD means you do things for Debian. If that's
not your thing, then go somewhere else. (This isn't targeted at anyone in
particular, I'm just emphasising why I think the long delay is really not a
problem.)
But I disagree with you that "real work" is the only thing that matters, too.
For T&S, it is true that doing things is probably better than asking
questions. Some time ago I saw some posts on this list, showing that this is
indeed being tried at the moment. That is good. (Note that I also consider
it a good thing that it is first being tried before doing it on a large scale.
;-) )
But for P&P, there's no way it can be checked with only "real work". The
Debian project has a philosophy, and I think it's a good thing that they try
to keep it that way. That means for example that people who can't read a
license cannot be a DD. Why not? Because DDs must consider it important to
have only free software in Debian. Important enough that they go and check if
it's ok when they package something new. Questions (and at least as
important, discussion about those questions) are the only way I can see to
test this.
One last thing: I do agree that the long DAM queue is a problem that needs
solving. I'm just saying that IMO it isn't as bad as many people seem to
think.
Summarizing:
- I think P&P tests must be done, and I think they need questions.
- I think T&S can be done with "real work", and it's worth trying if that is a
comfortable method for AM and NM, and if the right skills are indeed tested.
- I think most Debian related work can very well be done without being a DD,
and therefore I don't see the problem in NM taking a long time.
- The DAM queue problem should be fixed.
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature