Re: Stefano Zacchiroli 2012-06-25 <[🔎] 20120625165835.GB20683@upsilon.cc> > Making this even clearer with a *.incubator.debian.org namespace might > be a good idea. (Modulo some transition time, doing so will eventually > replace *.debian.net, if I got that right.) > - I've already discussed in a related thread of a few months ago how I > think the current distinction between debian.net and debian.org should > be documented, incidentally resolving other visibility problems of > those services. Not that the dnsZoneEntry LDAP entry is publicly > available, we should have an automated generated index of debian.net > services, with pointers to the responsible DD. I think it'd be a good > idea to have such index live at http://www.debian.net together with an > explanation of the debian.net/.org distinction. I don't think *this > part* of the confusion is enough to justify changes of the current > scheme (but see below for another possible reason). I agree that "debian.net" and "debian.org" are a tad too similar such that an outsider can clearly see that the former is "in incubation", but that's what we have at the moment, and I'd rather not replace it by something more ugly. Let's just document it more prominently. Maybe .debian.net owners should be encouraged to put a note on the website, or something like that. > Generally speaking, every time we add an approval step I start to fear > bottlenecks and the creation of new mighty powers; avoiding that is > one of the key advantages of the current scheme. If the main problem .debian.net is very useful in that it enables DDs to get things done. Let's not put in more bureaucracy in front of it. > is "squatting", then I see two possible solutions: > > 1) be liberal by default, but empower someone to decide that a name is > not acceptable. I think DSA would be a reasonable choice, as you > already decide on *.debian.org, but I suspect DSA would not want to > have this veto power (choice which I respect) Afaict there's no written rule that says "don't put your private homepage there" or similar. Actually "should be useful for Debian" should be enough of a rule. With that, someone can slap the offenders, e.g. DSA or DAM. > 2) find some clear cut rule. One I've proposed in the past is that for > any *.debian.org entry, the corresponding *.debian.net should not > exist (or point to the debian.org ones, depending on the protocol). > This one will still give some sort of veto power to DSA, but it > will come with the factual justification of an existing homonymous > service I've seen .debian.net used for testing .debian.org services, but that's mostly confusing to users. I wouldn't put in an official "must not exist" rule there, but an "should not exist or redirect to debian.org" makes sense. Btw, what would actually be an improvement would be shared debian.net entries, i.e. entries that anyone can edit. (Maybe that should even be the default.) Christoph -- cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature