On Sat Mar 14 19:11, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > if you allow me to share a thought here even though I am not a developer > and as such do not have any say in this. I certainly welcome thoughts from people involved in the project. > While the aims you list themself may be laudable to achieve > improvements, your *goal* with changing the membership procedures should > look something like > > Aid Debian to recruit skilled, cooperative, and highly dedicated new > volunteers and ensuring that Debian membership is only given to people > having these necessary qualities. > > Your idea of a good goal may vary, but ultimately, your goal should be > about membership, not process. Debian desperately lacks a vision for > developing its membership and sjould develop that to derive an adequate > process. OK (and I agree), but we are talking about changing the process and I'm afraid I don't find those sorts of statement very useful (personally) for discussing how to achieve it. I guess I also think that statement is obvious, but given the threads before Lenny I guess there are many things I think should be obvious but other people disagree with. > Believe it or not, if you step away from Debian and look back on it > after a few weeks, is seems miraculous that Debian does attract a fair > amount of wonderful people and manages to keep a lot of those around. > > Let me put some observations here > <snip> There are many things here I agree with, I don't think we can tackle them all at once here. I'm just trying to work on one thing. Matt -- Matthew Johnson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature