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

Re: Two GR concepts for dicussion

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> First, the "Debian Maintainers" concept, ie giving limited upload access
> to people prior to, or instead of, them becoming developers. [...]

I support this idea.  One question: how to remove bad or MIA DMs?

> My idea was to have an annual round where any DD could nominate themselves
> to join any team [...]

I'm less sure of this one.  Haven't past self-nominations been
rejected partly because the current team should *want* help for it to
work effectively?

Specific problems: why three as the limit?  What is core and what
isn't?  How can competence be demonstrated for tasks which require
privileged access to infrastructure?

> Hey, why not? A third idea: instead of having delegates or a committee
> or whatever to decide amongst disputes, how about randomly selecting a
> jury from DDs and having their word (on who's right, on what punishment
> is plausible) be absolutely final, with no appeal, ever?

This has much merit, apart from the "absolutely final" bit.  Allow one
appeal route (an undo GR?) within the project and realise that if we
go barking mad, there is *always* a possibility of Real-Life courts.

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: