Re: DM advocation for Martin-'Eric Racine
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> I believe that once you ask for being a DM or a DD, you implicitly
> accept a peer review. I'd say that DMs usually are advocated, and it's
> part of the responsibility of the advocate not to send someone asking
> for being advocated when he's obviously not ready.
There are some private notes/exchanges in the NM process AFAIK.
> One can regret that some people get publicly critiqued, but see the
> Q-FUNK thread, I believe the mails that are the worst for him are the
> ones _he_ sent and proved all the remarks being made about him being
> true.
But perhaps the messages from Q-FUNK are the worst because some people
refrained from posting.
> IOW, I believe it's half the "we do things in a transparent way" thing
> and the fact that DM application is not an automatic step but a
> conscious decision that make me think that such a "private" list isn't
> needed. I firmly believe that giving a sense of responsibility to the
> advocates gives more benefit on the long term.
Transparent to whom exactly? To the Internet and Google servers? I
don't think debian-newmaint@ is a place for teaching advocates about
their sense of responsibilities.
--
Loïc Minier
Reply to: