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

Re: Developer Status

Raphael Geissert wrote:
> 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).

You're very wrong here. The AM's job is to review if someone would be
capable of being a good Debian Developer. Reviewing responses to the
templates is *not* the main job. Have the prospective DD learn things;
get the prospective DD think and search before answering; and reviewing
actual tasks and skills by reviewing the prospective DD's packages next
to possible other 'tasks' takes most of the time.

It's not at all about a questionaire where you only have to tick the
right answers because that would defeat the spirit of the process. For
many applicants it takes a long time because they think it's just a



Reply to: