Re: Raphael Hertzog 2006-04-12 <[🔎] 20060412075009.GC2782@rivendell.ouaza.com> > - first require each appliacnt to document their contribution when > registering on nm.debian.org. Then the FD checks if it's enough > or not. If not, he's immediately put on hold and the applicant can come > back a few months later (unless we have an AM who is willing to also > play as "trainer"). In my feeling the web form makes it a bit too "easy" to apply, a mail-based system would require more interaction, and could at the same time include some "I did the following stuff" part. Maybe the current system should just be changed to send a mail to the applicant like it does sent to the prospective AM(s). > > 1.1.2 Application Managers > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > The lack of free Application Managers that led to the accumulation of > > applicants waiting for an AM is mostly based on the fact that many > > developers don't care about the NM process, so only a few people are > > actually helping out. > > And also that you rarely ask for new AM on d-d-a and that the AM HOWTO is > difficult to find and outdated. That's party because the front desk likes to get AMs by their own incentives. This should usually lead to AMs that are more interested in the process, and hence more active, than those that "only" reply to some d-d-a posting. > I don't know what happen on nm-committee but for example I believe that > general discussion between AM on how to improve the system can happen on > debian-newmaint@l.d.o instead. (And Christoph Berg told me that such > discussion have been going on nm-committee since that's where he discussed > the possibility to use MIA scripts for NM) The discussion is happening on -newmaint (and -project and -devel and...). Contrarily to what I told you on IRC, nm-committee didn't have anything of it, though I expected it would be involved in drafting Marc's mail we are discussing here. > > 1.2.5 More than one AM per applicant > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > On this topic, I would really like that we setup a centralized system > which would not be mandatory but we that we strongly encourage to use. > The best solution that I see is re-using a similar infrastructure than the > one used by MIA. Christoph Berg was ready to implement it (as I am). As I said on IRC, I would be interested myself to have such a central place to store my NM communication. What I don't want is any tool that would be used to check if a particular AM is inactive, slacking, unresponsive etc. Every AM whom I've asked what he thought about a central mailstore said "no thanks I like my privacy". At first I couldn't understand these reservations, but from reading the recent postings in this and the related threads, I do share them. AM bashing is the last thing that would help to improve the NM process, and even if not stated explicitely, the intention behind that MIA style DB seems (seemed?) to be the ability to check AM activity. I'd love to be proven wrong, but for now I'd rather spend my time on working with my current NMs (and the MIA stuff). Christoph -- cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature