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

Re: Developer Status

On Thursday 2008-10-23, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> Now about the new status you are proposing, my general feeling is:
> more bureaucracy \o/ What you are proposing is way too complicated for
> the outside world to understand.

It's less bureaucracy for a non-packaging contributor:
right now if a translator want's to be an official procect member he has to 
go through DM. I know I haven't bothered despite being actively involved 
with debian for 5+ years now (voting alone simply isn't worth the pain).

It's less bureaucrcy for the project as you don't have to go through the 
whole NM rigmarole for each contributor -packager or no-, you can now limit 
it to just the relevant bits.

As to the outside world, no need to go into nuances, you just go 'official 
project member' or not. If they wanna know more about a particular 
contributor just say that he is/is not involved with whatever area being 
asked about.

> I think adding a Debian Contributor status (no upload, no vote) with
> labels (translator, writer, ...) is a simple solution that fits the
> current issue pretty well.

Why no vote? Long term contributors to the project should have a voice IMHO. 
Wether they are packagers/translators/doc writers/... really should have no 
bearing on it.

> I have a problem with non-technical persons voting on technical
> issues, or issues having technical implications for the developer
> body. I have even more of a problem with non-technical persons leading
> a technical project.

First Actual techical issues are supposed to go the TC, not a GR (and 
looking at the list on http://www.debian.org/vote/ I have a hard time 
finding votes about purely technical issues)

Second Debian isn't a pure technical project: packaging, translating, 
documentation, bug fixing, QA, ... are all things that are part of Debian, 
that have long-term contributors working on them. 

Each of those have their own specialised bits of knowledge, sometimes they 
overlap partly.

> I am against this part of your proposal. Voting rights should be
> coupled with proper understanding of the Project at large, including
> the technical stuff, which is, after all, the base of this Project.

Does that also work the other way around with packagers having to understand 
translation/documentation/... stuff? Didn't think so.

> This whole status is useless. If you want to vote, go to DD
> status. You'll get upload rights too, that doesn't mean you have to
> make use of them.

There's this principle in security called 'least access', it's why we don't 
log in as root for everyday use.

Is there any particular reason you don't feel it should apply to something 
as potentially critical as upload rights?

> I expect going to DD status to be something doable for any contributor
> after a period of time.

IIRC the last time this came up people could name 1 or 2 non-packagers who 
had ever bothered with NM

-> while it is theoretically possible for non-packagers to go through NM, 
quite obviously it's currently not worth the pain in the opinion of the vast 
majority of non-packagers.

It doesn't stop us from contributing, but that doesn't mean we don't 
consider this a flaw in the process.
Cheers, Cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: