Re: Fear the new maintainer process
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:57:40 Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi Taketoshi Sano,
>
> I understand you are doing the best you can, and my answer is
> by no means personal. It is directed to the project.
>
> I can't help to be extremly worried about the new maintainer
> procedure.
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 01:31:22PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
> > (There are several applicants who
> > does not respond at all, or holding the process for months and
> > finally decide not to join the project, as I read from the list).
>
> So what? It's not as if the entry in the queue costs any
> money. Just wait until you get a response. You don't need to
> run after your applicants like a mum after her children :)
>
Should an application manager still sit on his hands if an applicant
fails to provide all the details after 3 months (this has happened to
me)? Right, it does not cost you any money, but the work you do for
applicants should at least give you the idea it is worthwile doing.
> > And, if ever my rejection did occur,
> > it does not mean at all the permanent rejection. It just means
> > to drop it from the head of the queue, and probably to move at the
> > tail (if he re-send his application when he is ready to do).
>
> So what is the purpose of the rejection? It would only
> make it worse for everyone, increasing their workload.
>
> > Please check the explanation on <http://www.debian.org/devel/join/nm-step5>
> >
> > Only if any of the critical items can not be completed by the
> > applicant, will the application be rejected. These include:
> >
> > * Failure to provide adequate identification.
> > * Failure to agree to our principles and procedures.
> > * Failure to deliver mutually agreed upon projects.
> >
> > While deadlines are important, some extension of deadlines is
> > certainly reasonable. However, considering that the applicant has
> > considerable input into the creation of the schedule, long delays
> > increase the likelihood of the application being rejected. When a
> > project fails to be delivered, or the time for delivery was determined
> > to be too long, the applicant will be given one additional opportunity
> > to succeed at a similar task.
>
> If this is the way we are treating volunteers who want to help,
> Debian deserves to die.
>
Hard words. The whole meaning of nm-step5 is to give us some kind of framework
to hold on to, like the description of all the other steps is.
25 people have set up guidelines for the process of becoming a developer.
I think it is a good reference. 'Rules' can always change. If you are
not happy with the guidelines we have set up, why don't you start a discussion
on nm-discuss?
> I knew that the new maintainer project is a serious mayhem.
> I was not aware of this single catastrophic point.
>
You call it catastrophic, I call it common sense.
> > > I saw such things coming when I first read about the new new maintainer
> > > procedure. I still thing it is overly complicated. Oh well.
> >
> > If you think it is definitely important thing to make him a member of
> > Debian, then you can yourself apply as one of Application Managers.
>
> I criticized the new procedure as soon as it was outlined by Wichert
> Ackermann, and never received an answer to my detailed critique.
>
You must be an expert on this field.
> > Now the new maintainer queue has over 100 people who has been waiting
> > when their Application Manager is assigined for them. Total number in
> > the processing queue is about 200 while the number of Application Managers
> > is only about 30. We need more and more Application Managers now.
>
> I prophecised this in my critique as well. I knew that the additional,
> completely unnecessary workload would require a lot of volunteers work,
> which is better spend for other things.
>
This has already been noted by Dale. When every manager is assigned 2
applicants,
who generally take about one month to finish their details, you have about
50 people in one month. You call this slow. I might call it 'good enough'.
> The people who developed this progress made some serious errors, and
> should now take some steps back and ease up the process again.
>
No. I cannot see any serious errors. I can see people trying very hard
to get a grip on the new-maintainer process. Their effort certainly
is worth it. I am sure that in the end something good will come out.
> > > Thanks anyway for your efforts,
> >
> > While I am not always agree with your opinion, I always respect most of
> > your words, Marcus. I will wait his reply for other several weeks
> > to keep the honour of attending the famous hacker who will enter our
> > project (maybe) soon.
>
> This should be done for everybody.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcus
>
>
Joop
--
Joop Stakenborg - Debian GNU/Linux developer <pa3aba@debian.org>
--> My woody here is pretty stable.
(More woody jokes at http://pa4tu.penguinpowered.com/woody)
Reply to: