Guidance on writing AM reports
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
I've just given my approval as an AM to my second DD candidate.
Though, I'm hoping to get some clarification on on writing AM reports
to ensure that future DDs are not going to be held up by any mistakes
on my part.
On nm.d.o, when you select "AM approved" for an application's
progress, a template for the AM report is presented. It is explicitly
stated that this will not be automatically emailed. So it is
surprising to see an email sent on your behalf sent to debian-newmaint.[0]
The first time, it produced a mostly empty mail. [1] So, I wrote a
"proper" AM report to debian-newmaint. The second time, it pulled the
"Short Biography" from n.d.o for use of the "Applicant background."
[2] Which is better, but the template implies that my AM report should
also include an "Identification & Account Data" section. Do I need to
follow this generated mail up with one of my own?
nm.d.o also tells you that you should email the mbox of correspondence
regarding the application to nm@debian.org along with minechangelog
output. As both are available as links on the applicants page, is this
still necessary?
It seems clear, that the aim is to eventually replace as much
paper-work as possible with automation via nm.d.o, which is great.
It's just unclear what is necessary for AM reports until that goal is
reached.
[0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736637
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2014/01/msg00042.html
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2014/02/msg00013.html
Thanks!
- --
- -- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio
Ubuntu Developer <https://launchpad.net/~andrewsomething>
Debian Developer <http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=asb>
PGP/GPG Key ID: D53FDCB1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=1uhC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: