On 23/06/09 at 15:30 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:55:42PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote: > > > OK, then what I'm proposing is to identify one single entity where the > > > decision is taken. Either is FD or is DAM. > > It's DAM. DAM has always been the position that decides who is a DD and > > who isn't. The whole FD/NM thing is just an advisory board to the DAM > > if you want to call it that. > > Then drop FD, it looks like it is just a waste of time, given that in > the "problematic" cases the dossier is just handed over to DAM for a > new full review. > > But as things stand nowadays, I wouldn't be happy with that outcome, > given that DAM is more understaffed than FD (2 people vs 4), with > Joerg also involved in another time-consuming role (ftpmaster). > > Hence I would more welcome one of the following alternative outcomes: > > 1) drop FD *and* integrate the current FD people into DAM; it looks > like accepting new members is the main part of DAM activities > anyhow, so why bother with an extra advisory board? > > 2) change the "It's DAM" fact above, from now on "it will be FD" > > How do people feel about that? I like the idea a lot. FD doesn't need to be removed completely. It could stay as a small group (including all DAM members, maybe) in charge of coordinating the assignement of applicants to AMs, but not doing any review of applications. Also, if our DPL is uncomfortable with the idea of adding 3 new members to DAM, he could add them as assistants first. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature