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

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

Christoph Berg dijo [Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:30:57PM +0200]:
> > As we still remember the big "on terminology" thread[0] and we don't
> > want here to create more confusion nor to start the big renaming race,
> > I think it will be better to leave terminology out of this GR, as this
> > will introduce even more ambiguity: aren't sponsored packagers
> > debian contributors(lowercase) too?
> Any name will be generic to some extend, unless it is long and ugly.
> > I'd thus propose not to call them Debian Contributors (DC) now, and let
> > NM/DAM team pick an appropriate name when reforming the procedures.
> The idea was discussed, and that's the name we came up with. If
> someone has a better idea, please tell us, and I'm sure zack will
> update the proposal.

Yes, the naming clearly stems from when we were a flatter, simpler
project with all-or-nothing participation. But we now have Debian
developers which are not DDs, Debian maintainers which are not DM, and
will surely have Debian contributors which are not DCs.

I'm thinking... If DD could be seen as an aggregation of privileges
(such as what I said in my previous mail, that DC+DM≈DD), adding just
one more step could make the process complete. Something along the
following lines, and bear with me with the ugly namings:

Current	name		New name		
Debian Developer	Debian Full Member
Debian Maintainer	Debian Restricted Package Uploader
(none) 			Debian Package Uploader
Debian Contributor	Debian Nontechnical Member

So, a DPU would be basically what today is a DM (or what I called a
DRPU), plus the ability to upload arbitrary packages, including NMUs.

A DNM would have all non-packaging-related privileges - voting,
debian.org mail forward. Machine accounts seems something vague which
could be here or in DPU. 

And a DFM would be what we currently have as DDs - the sum of

Reply to: