Re: DM application for Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 22:31 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> He repeats at lengths that he cares way more about quantity rather
> than quality, and always choses to upload new packages instead of fixing
> bugs, and all what he cares about is that a new upstream enters
> unstable, now matter how.
I know nothing of Adam and so can't comment on his
suitability for DM one way of the other.
However, some of objections you raise seem to me to
to be applicable to a DD, not a DM. As far as I can
see, becoming a DM makes it easier to maintain your
existing packages - nothing more.
A DM can't upload new packages, so granting him DM
status doesn't mean he can suddenly flood the archive
with them.
Unlike a DD a DM has no voting rights, no special
access to lists or infrastructure. So if Adam's views
are not consistent with Debian, granting him DM status
does not change the status quo.
All becoming a DM does is give the person the ability
to upload newer versions of his packages. If Adam
can be trusted to do that well, in a way that does
not cause additional work for everyone else, then
IMHO he should be given DM rights. Doing so will
increase the quality of Debian.
You imply that Adam can't be trusted to do that. If
so, Adam should not be given DM rights. If he can't
yet maintain packages well he should not be given DM
rights even if he is a shining champion of Debian's
ideals, even if he is a brilliant contributor to all
Debian's lists, even if he is excellent judge of which
packages should be in Debian and even if he was a
reliable maintainer of Debian's infrastructure. If he
does all those things well but can't maintain a package
giving him DM rights will reduce the quality of the
Debian archive and create work for everyone else.
Personally, I think splitting up responsibilities like
this is a good idea. A person who maintains packages
is not necessarily good at maintaining infrastructure
and Debian doesn't require them to be. Yet Debian
does seem to require people who maintain the
infrastructure to pass the "good at maintaining
packages" test. Moving further afield voting rights
should be tied to whether the person up-holds the
Debian ideals and spirit. I don't see how being good
maintainer, or organising conferences, contributing
to Debian legal, or doing translations or any other
particular job can be used as the only indication of
whether someone should be awarded voting rights.
Obviously regularly contributing to Debian by doing
one or more of those jobs is a requirement, but the
current emphasis on just one of them isn't healthy.
Splitting DM from the DD role is one step in this
direction. I am hopeful Debian will move further
along this line.
Reply to: