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

Re: Developer Status

2008/10/23 Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>:
> Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>>> On 11547 March 1977, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>>>>> Debian Maintainer
>>>>> -----------------
>>>>> They are allowed to upload their own (source) package. The allowed list
>>>>> of (source) packages to upload can be edited by any member of the NM
>>>>> committee[NMC], who will do a package check before they add new packages
>>>>> to the DM's list.
>>>> I believe everything is ok up to this point: why does the "NMC" need to
>>>> review the packages? I mean: has there been any problem with the current way
>>>> DMs are allowed to upload? can't <the project> trust in DDs as to what
>>>> packages can DMs upload?
>>> We do trust DDs - everyone can become a member of the NM Committee,
>>> you just have to do a little AM work.
>> "...you just have to do a /little/ extra work" I would say. I don't think that's
>> the right way to do it.
>> If a "reviewing team" is really needed it should be built from the QA side, not
>> from the management/NM side. Which would thereby have to drop the AM work
>> requirement and instead put some other sort of requirement, if needed/wanted.
> The NM committee is composed of AMs which already completed doing a
> review process succesfully in the last couple of months. So I think it's
> only logical to ask them to review. I think a (prospective) DM is better
> served by such a (hopefully) proper review than a possibly less good
> review of a random DD.

Right, but do the members of the NMC cover the wide variety of
programming languages?
or what kind of review are they going to do? just packaging stuff? if
it is just the latter it would be much easier and faster to send a RFC
to -mentors and let people scream out loud.

And please note that I said "QA side", with which I didn't mean to
refer to the QA group, but to a variety of people who know what to
look at and how to do it; not a random AM who happens to have already
completed doing a review process successfully (which actually doesn't
guarantee that the AM is competent enough, as the usual NM process
consists on sending the templates and later reviewing the responses).

Continuing with my example of sending an RFC to -mentors, I would be
interested in comparing the list of AMs also doing -mentors works with
those who don't, and with regular contributors to -mentors who are not
involved with NM.

> Cheers
> Luk

Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net

Robert Benchley  - "The surest way to make a monkey of a man is to quote him."

Reply to: