Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Joey Schulze wrote:
> I believe it has way to many flaws to be seconded.
Once the few wordings issues are sorted out, and once Anthony has
fixed the proposal so that a DM doesn't automatically get upload rights
on all packages where he's currently listed as Maintainer/Uploader (via
the mandatory "DM-Upload: yes" field that only a DD can add), then I
believe that the proposal would be good enough.
> > * the Debian Account Managers (Joerg Jaspert, James Troup)
> It would be nice to know what the DAMs think about this, especially
> James, since he's one of the reasons this proposal came up since
> the last stage before account creation takes oh so long. If he's
> totally opposed to this proposal, I'm not sure how much value it
> has at all.
Why? I fail to see how James could subvert a GR-endorsed proposal.
> > * the New-maintainer Front Desk (Christoph Berg, Marc Brockschmidt,
> > Brian Nelson)
> > * the FTP masters (James Troup, Ryan Murray, Anthony Towns)
> It would be nice to know what the FTP masters think about this proposal
> (the others, not Anthony).
If you expect an Answer from Ryan, you should certainly put him on CC and
ping him on IRC.
But you already know that, don't you ?
(I just pinged him)
> > * the Jetring developers (Joey Hess, Anthony Towns, Christoph Berg)
> The maintainer of software initially used should not per se have
> commit rights and decide who is granted. They should have proper
> rights to maintain the software which others are free to use, but
> nothing else.
They are not granted rights because they are the jetring developers but
because they are the people who made this all possible and as usual in
Debian, it's those that are doing the stuff, that get to handle it later
> > * the most recent version of the package uploaded to unstable
> > or experimental lists the uploader in the Maintainer: or Uploaders:
> > fields (ie, cannot NMU or hijack packages)
> > * the usual checks applied to uploads from Debian developers pass
> I'm missing any mention about taking over arbitrary packages since it
> was said that a DM can not simply upload arbitrary packages but is
> only permitted to upload them they came up initially and which were reviewed.
Check what I underlined above. It's already mentionned.
> I still believe that this proposal is flawed and we should address the
> real issue it secretly tries to solve.
> We should instead grant NM applicants permission to upload the
> packages they work on during their NMship *after* their AM has
> reviewed the packages and *after* they have demonstated to be
> competent enough to properly maintain them, even before they have
> finished NM and are only waiting for DAM activity.
This proposal is a super-set of your proposal. They don't conflict.
The AM can request DM rights when he feels like so.
BTW, NM requires active package maintenance for >6 months even before
you can start the NM process. It's quite possible that people are granted
DM rights on some of those packages even before they start NM.
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :