| Alexander Wirt 2004-09-05, 2:47 am |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>Ingo Juergensmann <ij@2004.bluespice.org> writes:
>
>
>
>
>So... I'm a little confused. What do you mean "there's no formal
>process for people like me"? The NM process certainly allows for
>things other than package maintenance. What about you is not covered
>by the existing process?
>
>
>
Yes you can do other things later, but its focussed on packaging and
maintaing packages.
[snip]
>
>
>
>I don't see anything on the NM page that says you must be a software
>packager to be a maintainer, but perhaps I missed this. Can you
>explain in more detail? Were you told not to be a maintaner because
>you didn't want to package, or what?
>
>
>
Thats not right, there are currently two NM processes,
first the classic NM process which is focussed on packaging
and maintaining packages, here you have to get a package
into the archive (I have several mails that prove that), to get
maintainer. On the other side there is a process for documentation
maintainers, as I currently know there is only of that maintainer existing
yet. This process is focussed on getting things documented. (XML, SGML,
docbook stuff). But there is no process that reflect the things a buildd
maintainer does.
Maybe we should create a process especially for people we have to trust
for several reasons, that don't wan't to get maintainers.
(Some kind of signation or advocate process).
Ingo for examples maintains buildds since I remember and I heard never any
complaints how (technically) they are maintained, so lets trust him.
I think every m68k user uses packages that are built on his buildd, this
was good
for several years and now its bad ? Thats a little bit stupid.
>
>I think this really doesn't amount to a hill of beans. I'm happy to
>hear a complaint if you tried and were rejected for illegitimate
>reasons. But to say "I never tried because I knew I would be
>rejected" doesn't carry much weight. We don't even have your
>say-soomas
>
>to go on, because you might be wrong about whether you'd be rejected.
>What exactly do you want?
>
>
>
I think he wants some official statement that he could continue his
work, without a new
moron that beginns to complain about new things next week.
>
>I didn't see anyone tell you to stop doing it. I see someone being
>worried about a similar kind of work; I see people discussing an
>issue. But nobody told you "don't do this"--moreover, nobody could
>have! You could ignore them; nothing stops you from building anything
>you like. At best, Debian could tell a developer to stop signing the
>packages, but I don't think that happened either.
>
>T
>
>
>
>
Sincerly
Alex
--
Alexander "formorer" Wirt KeyID: BC7D020A
EMail: formorer@debian.org ICQ: 28651245
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|