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

Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006

MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> writes:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <cobaco@linux.be>
>> The 'Maintainer' in NM is a misnomer, I understand it is possible to go 
>> through NM as a translator or documentation writer.
> I also had replies from Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt and Eddy Petrişor
> saying similar things. The first two paragraphs of the NM Corner
> seem to stress that only maintainers need be developers, then
> there's an explanation that developers can upload anything so
> we need to verify technical skills, before the intro finishes
> by suggesting sponsorship.

Before speaking about sponsorship (which some people wanting to maintain
packages as developer still don't know), this sentence clarifies the

| To ease the process, it is important to already be familiar with Debian,
| so we require that prospective developers have already contributed
| - in the form of translations, documentation, sending patches or
| package maintenance.  

> Looking in more detail, Step 4: Tasks and Skills does say that
> other contributions are possible, but suggests that these are
> special cases needing extra agreement from FrontDesk and DAM.

After speaking about writing documentation as way to show your
skills. The problem with other things is that an AM/the FD/the DAM often
can't verify the quality of these contributions, so we need to work out
how to control that. Think of translators, for example - I'd never say
I'm able to say if a translation to french is good, but I know that I
can ask Christian Perrier about that. Stuff like that should be
coordinated, so that no work needs to be done twice.

>> So maybe what we need to do is to rename NM to NC (new contributor) with 
>> subpages detailing the differnet T&S for the different classes of 
>> contributors.
> How about calling it New Developer if that's what it should be?

Why does it need to be changed? People maintain websites, translations,
documentation, packages - I don't see a reason to change the current

BOFH #324:
Your packets were eaten by the terminator

Attachment: pgphTsqmLvfQK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: