Russ Allbery wrote on 03/04/2006 03:41: I was actually reasonably > comfortable and content with the length of time it took my application to > be processed (about seven months, plus an additional three or four months > of work on Debian before I applied); I've been in contact with debian (providing bug reports and patches) for a few years before doing my first package (in September 04) and applying as a NM (on 2005-Feb-07). Waiting two month for AM assignment (on Apr. 19th) after my advocate signed my application on 2005-Feb-09 was tiresome, but OK. The fact that the following P&P and T&S tests took longer (until 2005-09-06) than necessary IMHO is again not good, but still OK. Than there is a slight discrepance between status web page and what my AM told be regarding his recommendation to DAM: status web page says 2005-10-26, AM says 09-06). Anyway, waiting two months (almost three) from the later date until FD approval (on 2006-01-16) is really tiresome. And again, 2 and a half months passed and DAM approval doesn't look much nearer (only 6 approvals happened in the past two months). So to some it up, I had the following pure waiting periods until now: Advocate signature to AM assignment: 2 months, 10 days tests completed to AM recommendation: 1 month, 6 days (according to DB) AM recommendation to FD approval: 2 months, 21 days FD approval to DAM approval: at least 2 month, 16 days Total waiting time: 8 months, 22 days Total activity time while in queue: 5 months, 1 days Note that I didn't take longer than approx. 1 week to answer _any_ mail I received related to my NM process. The total time between receiving a mail and answering it summed up over my process so far is less than 40 days, giving the "activity time" stated above quite a different note. So to me it actually looks like having spent less than 2 months _working_ on my NM process and about _one_year_ of waiting. If it were a steady process, totalling to less than half a year, I wouldn't even bother writing this mail, but the long waits in the process are simply ridiculous(*), at least in my humble opinion. *: I don't blame any individual for this, but IMHO Debian is hiding problems in handling the NM process by simply not showing any hint of what happens behind the szenes, which makes the waits seem even longer. cu, Sven PS: What's even worse: §2.1 of Debian's constitution lets people sit on their positions and not follow the duties these positions imply - without fear for any sort of "punishment" for not doing the duties a power implies. To be honest, I would like to try and change that paragraph in some sensible manner. Again, I'm not blaming any individual here, but Debian as a whole should really try and improve some things (the NM process just being one of them).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature