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

Re: Reforming the NM process

"Gustavo Franco" <gustavorfranco@gmail.com> writes:

> On 4/11/06, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <marc@marcbrockschmidt.de> wrote:
>> (...)
>> 3. Conclusions
>> ==============
>> (..)
>> I'd like to implement the proposals I made in (2.1) and (2.2) as fast as
>> possible, especially applying the rules in (2.2) to people already in the
>> queue waiting for an AM. (2.3) is, as I said, a long-term thingy - it
>> would be nice if it could happen at some point, but many details are not
>> yet worked out, the infrastructure needs to be changed for it and we
>> really need to decide if this is actually a good way.
> I agree with 2.1 (Multiple advocates) and in part with 2.2 (Requiring
> (more) work before applying). In part because it will help us block
> some newcomers that aren't really into it, but we've some problems
> already and starting the changes requiring more stuff from everybody
> will discard more valuable contributors too!

How is someone a valuable contributor who wants to be a packaging DD,
but can't maintain a package for a few months? Sorry, we don't ask for
extra work, just for the work you should be doing anyway when you're
applying as NM.

> I strongly disagree that 2.3 is a long-term thing. It should be
> started years ago, but it isn't too late yet. We should push it with a
> transition plan in mind (e.g: what we're going to do with the people
> that is already waiting for DAM?), but the transition couldn't require
> (more) work before applying, IMHO. We should block not really
> interested people giving less privileges for those who do less as you
> pointed out and be good with MIA and its procedures. I step in to help
> writing a 1-year transition plan and contact the people that needs to
> accept/reject some points, if you want.

I think I can handle this alone (thanks for the offer, anyway), but I'd
like to discuss this in the project before enforcing such changes.

BOFH #221:
The mainframe needs to rest.  It's getting old, you know.

Attachment: pgpox2FLwjf1l.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: