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

Re: Developer Status

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 04:56:36PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> My name is on the Maintainer field of 2 packages in main, and I
> think we can consider the Maintainer fields as "a list of
> contributors" (evidently, not all of them). I haven't (formally)
> agreed to any document, my key is not signed by anyone in the
> project, I haven't been advocated by anyone and certainly have not
> answered any set of predefined questions. Why should the bar for
> non-developing contributors should be different than mine (ie, they
> have to do more than just the work they are contributing)?

Nobody is saying that to contribute in general you will need something
more than at present. For example, nobody is proposing to get rid of
sponsors (which are now, and will be also in the future, to sponsor
anybody's work), or to inhibit people submit patches to the BTS (they
are contributors too!).

Still (part of) the proposal is to introduce a particular class of
contributors which is also able to vote on choices of the Debian
project (elections and GR). In the initial proposal that class happens
to be called "Debian Contributors", but that's just a matter of
naming, and you can argue that it is an inappropriate one.

Still, I hope you see the reason for adding some checks before letting
people to vote upon choices which are bounding for the Debian

After all sponsored uploads and patches are subject to review, why
voting rights shouldn't? And note that the "bar" would basically be
ID+P&P, which boils down to checking that you have an identity and
that you share the ideals of the Debian project.


Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è sempre /oo\ All one has to do is hit the right
uno zaino        -- A.Bergonzoni \__/ keys at the right time -- J.S.Bach

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: