On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 09:35:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> Then make it contigent on the person having made an upload in the last
> three months or something sensible. Also, I don't think asking a DM to
> be reapproved yearly or every other year would be that onerous.
>
> (It's also the direction we're moving in for shell accounts on d.o as
> you know; people who don't use them will have to go through changes@db
> to reactivate their shell access.)
I'm totally in favor of required periodic self-assessments, but the key
there is "self". In what you propose DMs should ask _others_ to maintain
upload access. That looks onerous, if only at the social level. The big
advantage in becoming DM is that you become autonomous, and with that
comes increased responsibility in what you do. Making the reconfirmation
dependent on others seems to go in the opposite direction.
If we want to avoid that DMs remain DMs by inertia, which is indeed a
worthwhile goal, then we should implement something similar to what we
have for DDs. By uploading (or voting, which however doesn't apply to
DMs) you won't get in the radar of WAT runs. And if we chose
reconfirmation as a way to go (for DDs as well), than they should be
self-reconfirmations.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature