[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal for reform of the Debian membership process

On Sat Dec 08 16:36, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> > The total time it took you to convince the relevant people in Debian
> > that you should be a DD was 301 days. Of those 301 days, you spent 4 and
> > a half hours working on it (along with five uploads of your packages,
> > and apparently a sponsored NMU).
> I thought you spent 4.5 hours working on the application, but
> otherwise you were doing regular packaging work in Debian.
> So you spent 4.5 hours in total on Debian (plus five uploads and NMU)
> for last half a year?

I was doing regular packaging work, except it was very hard to find a
sponsor. For every sponsored upload I think I had 5 or 6 or more
requests for uploads which went completely unanswered. Those figures are
time taken to show my AM that I am competent to be a DD, not time spent
on Debian while in NM.

A quick glance (or search) of the BTS or the wiki page I used in my NM
advocacy will show you that I was not inactive in the things that I
could do sans sponsorship either...

Sure, 300 days isn't a long time from first involvement with Debian to
becoming a DD, but I had one package in the archive in 2004 and had been
using Debian almost exclusively for 3 years prior to that. I didn't
apply to NM until I thought I was ready, and once I got through the
queues everyone seems to have agreed with that.

> Being DM allows me to upload packages immediatelly, while I am in NM,

DM makes it a lot better. I note that the DM proposal hadn't come into
effect until after I was approved by the DAM, which sort of felt little
pointless applying then.

Anyway, I was hoping to discuss my proposal, which you will see suggests
having multiple fine grained grants of access rights (such as DM), but
in a more structured way and using one as probation for the other. I
think this is a good thing, I think waiting in queues for no reason is a
bad thing, which I'm trying to help fix. 

You may disagree with me about how long it should take, but that's not
the only thing I'm trying to address. I don't think anyone disagrees
that the account creation wait should be shorter; by making access
control more fine grained it makes it easier to delegate at least some
of the decisions and tasks for those access permissions which aren't as
wide ranging. This may assuage the concerns some have over who is
sufficiently trustworthy to make those decisions.


Matthew Johnson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: