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

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

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de>
> > 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
> name.

It seems to cause confusion with the Maintainer (with a capital
like in NM) control field defined in -policy. If the process
applies to people other than those newly appearing in the
Maintainer field, rename. It seems better to name it after the
target of the process, what they become - a Developer.

[about needing special agreement for non-packaging work]
> 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.

As I understand it, most translations should already be
reviewed on the appropriate -l10n list. So, the AM should only
need second-language (2L) understanding of the target language
in order to verify the process, not the 1L skill to review the
translation themselves.

Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: