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

Bug#817914: developers-reference: globally change "new maintainer" into "new member"

Moin Holger :)

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:59:53PM +0100, Holger Wansing wrote:
> > yes, a patch to fix this would be awesome! Many thanks in advance! :)
> Patch is attached!

wow, that was quick! Many thanks for that!

> In fact, this member/maintainer/developer naming thing is somewhat tricky,


> and sometimes it's also irritating IMO (at least for people being new to Debian).

for everyone, I guess, to varying degrees...

> However, this is because the documents have developed over time, so the
> document has probably been written in times where only the developer role
> was existing, and later the maintainer role and then the member role has
> been introduced.


> Therefore, it's of course not possible and also not useful, to substitute
> all "maintainer" into "member" and the like (think about phrases like
> "maintainer script" and "maintainer field in control" and ...), which are
> still correct and will not be renamed into "member script" or "member field".
> This only as a explanation, why not all occurrences of "maintainer" have
> been switched to "member".

I totally agree and I also think you've done a few substituion too many,
see below...

> (Yes, this relativizes the bug title a bit :-) )
> I hope I got it mostly right.

in any case: many thanks for your quick response! let's get this settled

some (quick) comments, stuff I havent commented is fine IMO.

> -Given how easy it is to become a Debian Maintainer, you might want
> +Given how easy it is to become a Debian Member, you might want
>  to only sponsor people who plan to join. 

to become a Maintainer?

> -The process of registering as a developer is a process of verifying your
> +The process of registering as a member is a process of verifying your

... a maintainer?

(maybe then we also need one paragraph explaining that developers are
maintainers too? and developers are members, but members not necessarily
developers nor maintainers? ;)

> -Therefore, we need to verify new maintainers before we can give them accounts
> +Therefore, we need to verify new members before we can give them accounts
>  on our servers and let them upload packages.

not sure if members can get server access. maintainers surely can. maybe
"new developers/maintainers"? (also to answer my own question in the
previous paragraph, maybe be explicit and say
'member/developer/maintainer' if we mean that?

> -<title>Resources for Debian Developers and Debian Maintainers</title>
> +<title>Resources for Debian Members</title>\

see above :)

Even if this seems a bit confusing now I'd hope it was that bad. Have
you seen anything where you would like to rework your patch or do you
think it should rather go in as such?

(once it goes in it will trigger translation updates so we better are


       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: