[D-m-team] Giving people time to react (Re: debian-maintainers_1.17_i386.changes ACCEPTED)

[Matthew Johnson]

On Tue Jan 29 13:16, Lex Spoon wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 4:24 AM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
>> I strongly agree with Christoph. As it is I am of the opinion that it is
>> too easy to get DM rights (particularly given the number of people who
>> said 'it ought to take 3 months to become a DD' in response to my
>> suggestions of NM reform). One of the things which tempers that is the
>> public way in which DMs are proposed, giving people the opportunity to
>> review the DM and react.
>
>
> Can you explain why you and Christoph think it is too easy to get DM 
> rights?

It may be worth referring to my original post to -newmaint[0] and my
wiki page on the subject[1]. I think that the DM applications should be
managed through the same overall process as NM and should require an
(abbreviated) set of checks in the same style as NM. I think the current
NM process is too lengthy (mainly in administrative overhead, and it's
not as bad now that DM exists), but I think that DM is an overreaction
in the other direction.

> No system is going to result in perfect uploads.  The goal is to balance 
> good uploads versus timely uploads.  If there has really been only one 
> controversial upload by a DM, then that seems like a very good track record 
> in practice.  It would be hard to improve on such a low rate of bad 
> uploads.

It's not exactly been going for very long, and one every few months I
would say is quite high...

0. http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2007/12/msg00013.html
1. http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/AltReformedMembershipProcess

-- 
Matthew Johnson
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/d-m-team/attachments/20080129/69e23833/attachment.pgp