Re: On terminology

[Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de>]

On 07/02/2010 11:14 PM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Which is true, and it would probably be a good idea to clarify wording
>> that refers to Debian Members, since that's not the terminology that we
>> use in general and, with the existence of DMs, it can be confusing.
> Nowadays, we're asking people to become Maintainers so that they can
> become Debian Maintainers and *then* apply to the New Maintainer's
> process so that they can become Debian Developers.
> 
> Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I
> try to explain these to potential contributors?
> 
> Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it is?

I gues if we start renaming, we should do it properly.
(and I think the first really faulty thing was to choose the name Debian
Maintainers as maintainer is too widely used..., even maintainer and 'New
Maintainer' is confusing enough)


-- 
 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79
                   ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F