Hi Mattia, [ps: I just realized that you replied again, but I spent so much time writing this that I want to send it now :) ] First of all, I appreciate your concerns and it is good to know that people care about the quality of who is becoming an official member of the project. I also want to thanks all the people who supported me. To clarify a bit more the work I've been doing for Debian, I made a list in the bottom of this email, please check. Other reasons to become a DD_nu: I would like to be recognized as an official member of the project. This have motivational reasons, technical reasons (as mentioned in the debian-cloud team part below) and also I would like to have the right to vote and to have a saying in other decisions. On 08/02/2018 07:58 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > [ CCing also Helen's other application as DM ] [...] > > Have you considered asking for a guest account? > If you only need access to _certain_ machines, that's quite the easy > scapegoat. Also, it could be granted pretty much instantly. I wasn't sure if I could have guest access, if yes, then fine, but it seems that casulana is a core machine and it is possible that DSA team won't give me access if I am not a DD/DD_nu. Please, see in the list of contributions why I would like access to casulana machine. > > > I was also looking at your DM application indeed, but I consider that > pattern "I believe as [more power level] I [could do something]" is a > dangerous train of thought. You shouldn't be asking for something > because probably maybe at some point it might be handy; rather, you > should be trying to do something and see that you are blocked to do that > thing, or maybe have done so many things by going through somebody (i.e. > sent a relevant ton of good patches) to gain trust. Agreed. My declaration of intent wasn't clear enough, if I understand, becoming a DD is also about being recognized as an official member and have a saying in decisions too, please let me know if my understanding is not correct. > > You say "mainly for the debian-cloud image build process". I don't know > how that's done. If it's about code, I trust the code is public and you > could replicate it, same I hope for the build logs of those build > processes; so is there anything blocking you? Note that I totally > believe already that having access to all the relevant machines is more > handy, but I'd like to understand what's the problem. > Also in the context of allowing more external contributors: if > something like that requires any contributors to be able to ssh to a > .d.o machine, than that's something that ought to be fixed. > > > Furthermore, looking at > https://contributors.debian.org/contributor/koike-guest@alioth/ I can > see only contributions to bugs.d.o, > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?correspondent=helen.fornazier@gmail.com&archive=both > lists only 5 bugs. Personally I consider somebody that interacted with > only 5 bugs in the bts to not have enough knowledge of the bts to be > neither DM nor DD (but that's could easily be just me!). Please, see the list of contributions below regarding BTS. I also want to clarify that what Jonathan mentioned is true, I shouldn't have asked for DM before, this was a mistake. I am not doing any packaging at the moment so DM or full DD doesn't make sense. So I changed the application to DD_nu. And I also want to clarify I don't have any bad feelings in how this discussion was driven and again, I really appreciate all the support people have given to me. List of contributions: ===================== Debian-efi team: ---------------- * First proposed solution (Dak byhand scripts for signing): I implemented several versions of Dak byhand scripts for code signing, code can be checked at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821051 With the respective test cases. These were really useful to generate discussions between debian efi team, the ftp masters and the package maintainers (most of the discussions were on IRC) * Second proposed solution (signing service + byhand): I implemented the signing box package, the tests and the integration with Dak, those can be checked at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821051#257 * Third proposed solution (signing at buildd + byhands scripts): Helped raising discussions about this, most of the discussion were on IRC and dc17. As we were having several disagreements on the infrastructure regarding signing, I helped organizing a secure boot sprint last year (April 2018). * Forth and final proposed solution (signing service + dak API + template package). During the secure boot sprint, I implemented part of the signing service, together with Luke Faraone: https://salsa.debian.org/ftp-team/code-signing (please check commit history). * debian-efi dc18 report: I organized the secure boot status report talk: Talk: https://debconf18.debconf.org/talks/59-report-from-the-debian-efi-team-about-the-support-of-secure-boot-on-debian/ Preparation os slides: https://lists.debian.org/debian-efi/2018/07/msg00015.html Debian-cloud team: ------------------ I participated in the cloud sprint oct 2017, I helped with planing how we want the infrastructure to be. I also helped coding the tests: https://salsa.debian.org/cloud-team/debian-cloud-tests More info can be found in gobby.debian.org/Sprints/CloudSprint2017 And now I intend to make these official Debian images real. To make all these infrastructure to work, I would like access to the casulana machine. I will do almost all the bits in my machine then perform a PR in the git repo. After I do this, I also would like to test in the casulana machine to make sure everything works as expected. I wasn't sure if I could have guest access, if yes, then fine, but it seems that casulana is a core machine and it is possible that DSA team won't give me access if I am not a DD. I could have a sponsor to do this verification in casulana for me. But I also have other motivations to became a official member of the project (please see at the end of this email). BTS: --------------------- I have some other emails with some other bugs I interacted with: * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?correspondent=helen.koike@collabora.com&archive=both https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?correspondent=helen.koike@collabora.co.uk&archive=both Not much, but as a DD NON-uploader, I thought that interacting with packages was not the focus. Could you please clarify what a DD_NU is about? Events and talks: --------------------- Talks/bofs: https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/68/ https://debconf18.debconf.org/talks/59-report-from-the-debian-efi-team-about-the-support-of-secure-boot-on-debian/ https://debconf18.debconf.org/talks/105-debian-cloud-team-bof/ I am doing volunteer work for dc18 (video and catering mostly), I am also trying to learn with the organization in general to help dc19. I am in the organization of dc19. Debian day: I'll give a talk here https://wiki.debian.org/DebianDay/2018/Brasil/Taquaritinga I am organizing this: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianDay/2018/Campinas Mentorship: -------------------- I am organizing this: https://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2018/05/msg00005.html Within this initiative, I expect to start packaging ASAP, not just me actually, but me and 3 more people. We are doing weekly meeting in how to package. After this training I intent to help co-maintain GDB package as Héctor mentioned and I also hope these 3 other people to continue contributing with Debian. So my plan is to upgrade to full DD after I get experience with packaging. Thanks Helen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature