[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal, alternative update

Steffen Joeris wrote:
> I took ajs proposal and modified it to fit my understanding of DM. See the 
> patch below the proposal, together with my comments for more information.
> I avoid repeating most of the arguments, which were send several times in 
> dozens of mails. This is just my proposal and let's see, if some people want 
> to support it, or if we just forget about it :)
> ==== Debian Maintainers Proposal ====
> The Debian Project endorses the concept of "Debian Maintainers" with
> limited access, and resolves that:
> 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
>    It will be initially maintained by:
>         * the Debian Account Managers (Joerg Jaspert, James Troup)
>         * the New-maintainer Front Desk (Christoph Berg, Marc Brockschmidt,
>           Brian Nelson)
>         * the Debian Keyring maintenaners (James Troup, Michael Beattie)

>    It will be known as the normal people behind the NM process.
>    Changes to the team may be made by the DPL under the normal rules for
>    delegations or if the teams accept new members.
>    The keyring will be packaged for Debian, and regularly uploaded
>    to unstable.
> 2) The initial policy for an individual to be included in the keyring
>    will be:
>         * that the applicant acknowledges Debian's social contract,
>           free software guidelines, and machine usage policies.
>         * that the applicant provides a valid gpg key, signed by a
>           Debian developer (and preferably connected to the web of
>           trust by multiple paths).
>         * that at least one Debian developer (preferably more) is willing
>           to advocate the applicant's inclusion, in particular that the
>           applicant is technically competent and good to work with.
>         * that the applicant has to go through an NM process
>           (this means the ID check and the most important parts of P&P and T&S
>           have to be done, the AM needs to recommend the NM and FD needs to 
> check
>           whether the report is complete or not)
> (Note: If the NM applies for DD status, he can become a DM after FD approval)

Is "an NM process" different from "the NM process"?

If the last item would require the applicant to apply for NM-ship and
not be rejected from this process, it would help those in the NM process
waiting for one thing or another.  It should be required that the applicant
is maintaining a package already as well, though.



GNU GPL: "The source will be with you... always."

Reply to: