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

Re: Improving the DAM-queue?

On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 09:20:15PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > Thus, people who don't know me and
> > don't know the quality of my work must waste time checking up on my work
> > so that they feel safe sponsoring my packages.  That time would be
> > better spent helping out someone who is just getting started.
> I agree with your other points, however this one here is mooth.
> Every sponsor shall review any package as carefull as possible,
> regardless from whom it was prepared, to ensure integrity of the archive.
What you have said is my point.  For all intents and purposes I am
already a DD (sans FD/DAM formality checks and accounts).  What special
knowledge will be imbued upon me when my accounts are created that will
make it so I no longer require a sponsor to look over my shoulder?

Thus, the requirement that every sponsor review every package which
he/she sponsors, while necessary, also bears an additional burned due to
the slow processing of the DAM queue.  AFAICT, as people get further
along in NM they tend to work on more packages or on the packages they
have more often.  This requieres more sponsorship, for each and every
single upload.  So, for every single applicant who is declared ready by
his/her AM, there will be a six month windows where another DD must
check up on the applicant's work for no reason other than the applicant
is handicapped from being allowed to upload.

Some are fortunate to work on teams which have a DD or two , but others
are not.

Now, some people may think that an extra six months of having packages
verified before upload is a good thing.  I am not opposed to it myself,
but if this is going to be the standard way of things, it needs to be
stated explicitly in the NM policy.  Something like:

    Upon the declaration of the AM that the applicant has completed all
    necessary checks involving the AM and forwarding the application to
    the FD, the applicant will be required to wait a minimum of six
    months before the accounts are finally created.  This period is
    intended as a time when prospective Debian developers can operate
    with less supervision than under the initial phases of the NM
    process and gain valuable experience that will be necessary as a
    full-fledged Debian developer.  In having the applicant's packages
    further reviewd by another Debian developer, the integrity and
    quality of the archive are maintained.

Now, that is completely off the top of my head, so it may not even sound
very good.  But, you get the idea.  Now, if something like were to be
imlpemented, then an expedited method needs to exist for the
"probationary" DDs to request package uploads.  That is, there should be
a list or an IRC channel, or whatever.  That way, DDs who want to help
know that they working with a package created by someone who is nearly a
DD not just starting out.

I think the distinction is important, because it seems as some DDs who
otherwise help are put off by the time invesment required to review a
new applicant's packages and provide useful feedback and answer
questions.  Such a need should be greatly diminshed after someone has
been working on packages for 12-18 months.

Now, if the "probationary" period is not going to be enforced as a
policy, then work needs to be done to speed DAM processing.  Otherwise,
what is the point?



Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: