|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > August 2005 > fresh blood gets congested: long way to become DD
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
fresh blood gets congested: long way to become DD
|
|
| Yaroslav Halchenko 2005-08-01, 8:31 am |
| Dear DDs and The Rest,
I am as the one who applied to become a DD and I am very curious
-- is that just a human factor (people, ie AMs are busy) or it is more
psychological -- test by time?
If you look at http://nm.debian.org/ average statistics
Awaiting AM assignment 140 days
Awaiting DAM Approval 184 days
it is quite long period of time I would say. I completely understand
that there must be a thorough selection of DDs but I doubt that the time
test should be the main factor.
I'm not sure if any additional AMs are necessary -- there is a
sufficient quantity of them to cover all current DD applicants...
So I think that there must be some other reason for such lengthy queues.
Can anyone highlight me?
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| | |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| * Yaroslav Halchenko (debian@onerussian.com) [050801 12:20]:
> I'm not sure if any additional AMs are necessary -- there is a
> sufficient quantity of them to cover all current DD applicants...
We would need more good AMs, we have too few.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| * Neil McGovern (neilm@debian.org) [050801 14:02]:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 01:58:55PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> What are the requirements to become a AM?
Be a debian developer, know about Debian more than the average, have
experience with QA or so (because you need to check a lot with other
people's packages) and a known good record, have time to burn, contact
front desk.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Neil McGovern 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 01:58:55PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Yaroslav Halchenko (debian@onerussian.com) [050801 12:20]:
>
> We would need more good AMs, we have too few.
>
What are the requirements to become a AM?
Regards,
Neil
--
__
.Ž `. neilm@debian.org
: :' ! ----------------
`. `Ž gpg: B345BDD3
`- Please don't cc, I'm subscribed to the list
| |
| Nikita V. Youshchenko 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| > Awaiting AM assignment 140 days
> Awaiting DAM Approval 184 days
I'm already waiting for DAM approval for almost 6 months, and I'm ready to
wait more (after all, there is a psyhological difference between a day and
a month, but not between 6 and 12 months).
The only thing that makes me feel uncomfortable now is that I'm not able to
upload packages that fix bugs timely - communication with sponsor leads to
very long overhead - probably because of vacation season...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Nico Golde 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| Hi,
* Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> [2005-08-01 15:16]:
> * Neil McGovern (neilm@debian.org) [050801 14:02]:
>
>
>
> Be a debian developer, know about Debian more than the average, have
> experience with QA or so (because you need to check a lot with other
> people's packages) and a known good record, have time to burn, contact
> front desk.
And to be dd at least 6 months afaik.
Regards Nico
--
Nico Golde - JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de | GPG: 0x73647CFF
http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org
VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps
and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-01, 8:32 am |
| Hi,
* Nico Golde (nico@ngolde.de) [050801 15:21]:
> * Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> [2005-08-01 15:16]:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> And to be dd at least 6 months afaik.
On the very day I got my account, Frontdesk asked me in IRC whether I
want to become AM. That speaks against that theory. 
But people going to become AM should have a broader experience in Debian
than just maintaining one package. There are multiple ways to get that,
and of course, being in the game a bit longer helps there.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Laszlo Boszormenyi 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| Hi Nikita,
(Are you a girl maybe?)
On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 15:55 +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> The only thing that makes me feel uncomfortable now is that I'm not able to
> upload packages that fix bugs timely - communication with sponsor leads to
> very long overhead - probably because of vacation season...
Well, I do not know which package is it, but if it isn't too
complicated, then please contact me and I may help you out.
Regards,
Laszlo/GCS
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thomas Hood 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| I notice that some of the statistics at http://nm.debian.org/ don't make
sense.
Mode Median Average Max
Count Days Days Days Days
New Maintainers processed 720 347 347 343 343
The mode can't be greater than the maximum. And I know that the maximum
is larger than 343.
--
Thomas Hood
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andrew Suffield 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:03:44PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> I notice that some of the statistics at http://nm.debian.org/ don't make
> sense.
They are in fact complete nonsense, because of the way they're
calculated. I keep meaning to do something about it but never have
time. As it stands, they don't really say anything useful.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
| |
| Adam Heath 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> Hi Nikita,
> (Are you a girl maybe?)
What does that have to do with anything? Stop being male-chauvanistic.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Philipp Kern 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 15:23 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> On the very day I got my account, Frontdesk asked me in IRC whether I
> want to become AM. That speaks against that theory.
Apart from that it's not just a theory. ;)
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Goswin von Brederlow 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| Thomas Hood <jdthood@aglu.demon.nl> writes:
> I notice that some of the statistics at http://nm.debian.org/ don't make
> sense.
> Mode Median Average Max
> Count Days Days Days Days
> New Maintainers processed 720 347 347 343 343
>
> The mode can't be greater than the maximum. And I know that the maximum
> is larger than 343.
> --
> Thomas Hood
The numbers are also derived (all? some?) only from entries that have
completed that step. So anybody that gets rejected or is still in the
queue isn't counted. Only accepted DDs are in that specific line I
believe.
MfG
Goswin
PS: Does that suggest that if you haven't made it in 343 days then you
won't?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Roberto C. Sanchez 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:35:33AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
>
>
> What does that have to do with anything? Stop being male-chauvanistic.
>
Maybe Laszlo wants to know which would be the proper pronoun reference.
It is better to ask and be certain than to err and offend.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
| |
| Laszlo Boszormenyi 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 11:35 -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
>
>
> What does that have to do with anything? Stop being male-chauvanistic.
Nothing. It was just a question, as Nikita sounds to be a female name,
but as I'm not sure about it, I was just interested. At least for me, a
Hungarian, it sounds like a female name.
Please describe the meaning of 'male-chauvanistic'; my english is not
so good and I could not find it in the dictionary I was looking into.
If possible, be in private, don't flood -devel.
Just to get it straight: the question was in brackets; I help her/him
anyway if his/her package(s) is not that complicated=I can build it
without too much dependencies, can try it out that it still works and
so on. For example I can handle a vim/lincity/mono like package, but not
an other big and special package, which needs special files/knowledge to
run like a raytrace/mathematical package.
Regards,
Laszlo/GCS
| |
| Lionel Elie Mamane 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 08:24:30PM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 11:35 -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
>male-chauvanistic.
> Nothing. It was just a question, as Nikita sounds to be a female
> name, but as I'm not sure about it, I was just interested. At least
> for me, a Hungarian, it sounds like a female name.
It does to me, too, but they always claimed that Nikita Khrouchtev was
a male.
> Please describe the meaning of 'male-chauvanistic'; my english is not
> so good and I could not find it in the dictionary I was looking into.
I think he meant "chauvinistic". See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Yaroslav Halchenko 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 01:51:53PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> No.
Indeed - I counted "grave stones" as well. So there are 61 registered
AMs. And just 39 from them are "active" (ie having ND assigned and not
yet waiting for DAM) with next AMs being most active:
19 he
11 joerg
7 sfrost
6 maxx
6 csmall
5 pyro
So there are 12 AMs which are listed and which do not carry any load,
although the load is there and knocking the door :-)
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
| |
| Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 01:59:12PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
> Maybe Laszlo wants to know which would be the proper pronoun reference.
> It is better to ask and be certain than to err and offend.
Another reason to include sex in db.debian.org which seems to be easy to
implement, and not implemented becouse of uknown reasons.
regards
fEnIo
--
,''`. Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fenio@debian.org | pgp:0x13fefc40 | irc:fEnIo
: :' : 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Poland
`. `' phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
`- http://skawina.eu.org | jid:fenio@jabber.org | rlu:172001
| |
| Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On 20050801T153347-0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> So there are 12 AMs which are listed and which do not carry any load,
> although the load is there and knocking the door :-)
I don't know how many of those are in my position: I am practically a
newbie as an AM and as such I will carry little weight until I have the
procedure down for myself, which takes full processing of one candidate.
After that, I will assess my limit as to how much load I can carry, and
I will then start taking on more candidates.
I would be surprised if I was the only new AM after the NM talk in
Debconf
--
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Debian developer
http://kaijanaho.info/antti-juhani/blog/en/debian
| |
| Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On 20050801T135912-0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Maybe Laszlo wants to know which would be the proper pronoun reference.
"Ey" is good for everybody, even the genderqueer.
(Tip: ey talks to em about eir stuff)
--
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Debian developer
http://kaijanaho.info/antti-juhani/blog/en/debian
| |
| David Moreno Garza 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 15:55 +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
>
> I'm already waiting for DAM approval for almost 6 months, and I'm
> ready to
> wait more (after all, there is a psyhological difference between a day
> and
> a month, but not between 6 and 12 months).
>
> The only thing that makes me feel uncomfortable now is that I'm not
> able to
> upload packages that fix bugs timely - communication with sponsor
> leads to
> very long overhead - probably because of vacation season...
Actually, the same for me, almost.
I have been in the whole NM process for more than 13 months now. I spent
around 6 months with my AM, around another 6 to be approved by the DAM
and I'm waiting now, since a month ago, for my account to be created.
Yes, I also know some people have had longer times.
The thing that makes me feel uncomfortable is how Debian cannot
encourage people for helping the project with this. Motivation probably
just leaves with the long time waiting (in my case, there is nothing
else on my hands to do). People just loses faith. It is sad to see the
process is more a matter of time, than capacity or work done,
experience. And well, right now I feel so close but also so far, because
of the uncertainty, to conclude my process.
--
David Moreno Garza <damog@damog.net> | http://www.damog.net/
Those who can't write, write help files.
GPG: C671257D - 6EF6 C284 C95D 78F6 0B78 FFD3 981C 5FD7 C671 257D
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Roberto C. Sanchez 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 03:49:33PM -0500, David Moreno Garza wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 15:55 +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
>
> Actually, the same for me, almost.
>
> I have been in the whole NM process for more than 13 months now. I spent
> around 6 months with my AM, around another 6 to be approved by the DAM
> and I'm waiting now, since a month ago, for my account to be created.
> Yes, I also know some people have had longer times.
>
> The thing that makes me feel uncomfortable is how Debian cannot
> encourage people for helping the project with this. Motivation probably
> just leaves with the long time waiting (in my case, there is nothing
> else on my hands to do). People just loses faith. It is sad to see the
> process is more a matter of time, than capacity or work done,
> experience. And well, right now I feel so close but also so far, because
> of the uncertainty, to conclude my process.
I will have to nod in agreement. Although it has only been a couple
of months since I entered the NM queue, looking at how long many of the
candidates ahead of me have been in the queue is rather disheartening.
I plan to stick it out, but I am sure that there others who are not
willing to wait so long.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| | |
| Roger Leigh 2005-08-01, 5:54 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
David Moreno Garza <damog@damog.net> writes:
> I have been in the whole NM process for more than 13 months now. I
> spent around 6 months with my AM, around another 6 to be approved by
> the DAM and I'm waiting now, since a month ago, for my account to be
> created. Yes, I also know some people have had longer times.
>
> The thing that makes me feel uncomfortable is how Debian cannot
> encourage people for helping the project with this. Motivation probably
> just leaves with the long time waiting (in my case, there is nothing
> else on my hands to do). People just loses faith. It is sad to see the
> process is more a matter of time, than capacity or work done,
> experience. And well, right now I feel so close but also so far, because
> of the uncertainty, to conclude my process.
A Debian account isn't that essential. I had packages in Debian for
at least a year before I was invited to join the project. The
additional 11 months I waited in the NM queue didn't stop me doing
useful work.
- --
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQFC7pcAVcFcaSW/ uEgRAk7BAJ4808h6laNdShE2R61O1ZjYXB1xwACg
lWtA
5MY3affmydjtXYpAkeZ9ryU=
=+c2m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Stepan Golosunov 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 08:24:30PM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> Nothing. It was just a question, as Nikita sounds to be a female name,
> but as I'm not sure about it, I was just interested. At least for me, a
> Hungarian, it sounds like a female name.
In Russia, Nikita is (exclusively) male name.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Nigel Jones 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On 02/08/05, Stepan Golosunov <stepan@golosunov.pp.ru> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 08:24:30PM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
>=20
> In Russia, Nikita is (exclusively) male name.
Hmmm, can we maybe get back to the ON Topic part of this?
Personally I think get a couple of active developers that have been
around a little while that maintain a few packages and get them into
the AM role, and move some of the AMs into a DAM role...
Also: say that if an AM/DAM does not process x applications a month
(reasonably fair amount (say 5) and allow for vaccations/sickness etc)
then they may face removal, as Yaroslav Halchenko said, there are ~61
AM's, if each processed 3-4 applications a month (fairly) the queue
could drop by 180+ in just a month, and that is only really 1 a
week... Now I'm not sure exactly how hard an AM's work is, so lets
make it 1 a fortnight, and it's ~ 90 processed by AM's in a month -
more reasonable, and most likely enough to get the backlogs sorted
out.
>
>=20
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian=
..org
>=20
>=20
--=20
N Jones
Blogging @ http://nigelj.blogspot.com
Proud Debian & FOSS User
Debian Maintainer of: html2ps & ipkungfu
| |
| Kevin Mark 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:19:46PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com> writes:
>
> Well, both Joerg and me want to reduce the number of applicants we're
> processing at the same time, so more AMs would really be helpful.
>
> The problem is that Application Managers need to be able to invest some
> time on a regular basis *and* know a lot about Debian Policy, Packaging
> and QA. That's the reason for the usual "AMs should be DDs for 6
> months". We know that this is very general, but it allows people to gain
> experience as mentors and sponsors. Sometimes, we ignore it - when people
> have shown their skills in the NM checks, for example.
>
> It's not easy to see how well someone will work as Application Manager
> before they actually do it. AMs who used to be very responsive, friendly
> and tried to explain everything tend to get bored by the repetition;
Hi 'HE' (one day I shall find the origin of this),
If AM's repeatedly answer the same questions, then have those answers
been made into a FAQ(not having googled for an answer)? (if so, could
you point me to its location). Just curious (as one day I may get
there x-))
Cheers,
Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
`$' $'
$ $ _
,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
$$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
`Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
| |
| Kevin Mark 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 03:31:36PM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
> On 02/08/05, Stepan Golosunov <stepan@golosunov.pp.ru> wrote:
> Hmmm, can we maybe get back to the ON Topic part of this?
>
> Personally I think get a couple of active developers that have been
> around a little while that maintain a few packages and get them into
> the AM role, and move some of the AMs into a DAM role...
>
> Also: say that if an AM/DAM does not process x applications a month
> (reasonably fair amount (say 5) and allow for vaccations/sickness etc)
> then they may face removal, as Yaroslav Halchenko said, there are ~61
Hi Nigel,
would it be helpful to have some kind of status check every 6mo. to ask
the AM's if they have the available time to process N apps. Something
like 'no time','vacation','accepting N applicants'. If folks know who is
'open for business', it eliminates the confusion as who to ask. Then
again, I just realized that I have no idea how NM and AM get
'connected'. So maybe someone can point me to the DOCS on this.
Cheers,
kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
`$' $'
$ $ _
,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
$$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
`Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
| |
| Nigel Jones 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On 02/08/05, Kevin Mark <kmark+debian-devel@pipeline.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 03:31:36PM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
ame,[vbcol=seagreen]
e, a[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Nigel,
> would it be helpful to have some kind of status check every 6mo. to ask
> the AM's if they have the available time to process N apps. Something
> like 'no time','vacation','accepting N applicants'. If folks know who is
> 'open for business', it eliminates the confusion as who to ask. Then
> again, I just realized that I have no idea how NM and AM get
> 'connected'. So maybe someone can point me to the DOCS on this.
That sounds way better than what I suggested, but yeah.
> Cheers,
> kev
> --
> counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
> `$' $'
> $ $ _
> ,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
> ,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
> $$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
> `$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
> `Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
>=20
>=20
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>=20
> iD8DBQFC7wveRp+kG4Nu// URAu7jAJ4ib989xVtl7kHpY23eayZMcV19WwCdFB
R8
> rHlabRo1mYSKM32falSIcH8=3D
> =3DCZqP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>=20
>=20
>=20
--=20
N Jones
Blogging @ http://nigelj.blogspot.com
Proud Debian & FOSS User
Debian Maintainer of: html2ps & ipkungfu
| |
| Kevin Mark 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 10:42:17PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> David Moreno Garza <damog@damog.net> writes:
>
>
> A Debian account isn't that essential. I had packages in Debian for
> at least a year before I was invited to join the project. The
> additional 11 months I waited in the NM queue didn't stop me doing
> useful work.
Hi Roger,
you seem to be aware of facts that have eluded other NMs. Can you point
to how you aquired this info and how other have missed it. Many folks
dont RFTM. If is not stated clearly in say a NM FAQ, should it?
just asking.
Cheers,
Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
`$' $'
$ $ _
,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
$$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
`Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
| |
| Yaroslav Halchenko 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 02:03:09AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> you seem to be aware of facts that have eluded other NMs. Can you point
> to how you aquired this info and how other have missed it. Many folks
> dont RFTM. If is not stated clearly in say a NM FAQ, should it?
Hi Kevin,
Sorry for the intrusion, I just want to support Roger's opinion and
give a few hints as you requested.
I think that NM FAQ would be of limited importance because all possible
FAQ to appear in it are covered either in Debian policy or mentors FAQ
and sponsor section is of particular interest
http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/d...nsored_packages
Indeed to do THE WORK it is not necessary to be a DD. It is just that
for upload of packages into debian non-DD needs to interact with a
sponsor. Also administrativa like voting can't be done by non-DD.
Besides that I don't see any difficulties as to do packaging and
to interact_with/influence the debian community
P.S. I brought up the topic because I think the path to become DD should
not be done in "burocratic" way which is characterized by a high ratio of
waiting time to processing time.
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
| |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-02, 2:57 am |
| * Nigel Jones (nigelj@gmail.com) [050802 05:31]:
> Also: say that if an AM/DAM does not process x applications a month
> (reasonably fair amount (say 5) and allow for vaccations/sickness etc)
> then they may face removal
I don't know if you've every worked as AM, but if you have other duties
in Debian and perhaps even a life, then it is next to impossible to work
on 5 applicants per month. And, BTW, is it not our problem to have too
few AMs and you propose reducing their numbers even more? Even an AM
that processes only one applicant at each time reduces the load of the
queue in total (perhaps not as much as an AM that processes more than
one, but that's still better than nothing).
> Now I'm not sure exactly how hard an AM's work is
Yes, one could see that.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| | |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| | |
| Yaroslav Halchenko 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 10:28:08AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> on 5 applicants per month. And, BTW, is it not our problem to have too
Well, I can just say such AMs a big "Thank you" :-)
> few AMs and you propose reducing their numbers even more? Even an AM
> Yes, one could see that.
So, Andreas is making the point that it is good to keep "silent" AMs on
the list with hope that some of them can get at least 1 NM
on-board and work with him/her...
Then I have a better idea... It seems to me that any DD-professional is capable
of performing AM duties, isn't it? Then I would say it might make sense
to send an announcement to any DD with experience over X month and Y
packages maintained if they want to be just considered for AM process.
After that, any such DD would be informed about fresh meat NM which
comes in the queue. To interest/intrigue any particular DD I would
suggest to include a short (up to 100 words) "resume" from NM covering
his interests/experience. Debian is a community project after all and
personally, I get excited when I get in touch with people having similar
interests.
That is why I think that a short resume (after NM was advocated) + wider
range of AMs can help to resolve the congestion.
To get it more standardized it can be a simple form to fill in with
interest/experience options to be marked. That might interest AMs/DDs in
considering a specific applicant.
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| | |
| Yaroslav Halchenko 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| > > Then I would say it might make sense to send an announcement to any
> Right, because *new* developers have no idea about the NM process and
> just need the reminder that it exists to jump up and help. Sorry, the
> whole thing doesn't work this way: You need to invest a lot of time
> into AM work, so you need to care about it. Just asking every new
> developer will not help.
I'm sorry to clarify myself. I gratefully respect time spent by any DD
working on the project and tenfold time of any AM interfacing with NM --
NMs (like me probably :-)) can be "pain in the butt" to deal with.
I was talking about X>=12 and Y>=5 which wouldn't name any
such developer as *new* under my classification. My idea is just to
delegate AM duties to the DDs mature enough and able/willing to help.
Then all of the AMs who has the ability to perform AM duties and who are
for some probably truly respectful reason are having 0 NM assigned with
more than 50 NMs in the queue wouldn't look a bit awkward.
/Sorry for the long and probably unparsable sentence.../
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
| |
| Thijs Kinkhorst 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| On Tue, August 2, 2005 10:28, Andreas Barth wrote:
> And, BTW, is it not our problem to have too few AMs
While I can agree that there are too few AMs, the whole process itself
seems pretty bureaucratic with room for improvement. Once you've completed
the AM stage, this still has to happen:
- AM checks application.
- Front Desk checks application.
- DAM checks application.
- DAM creates account.
(Source: nm.debian.org)
So, once the AM, who has done a thorough review of the candidate, then you
still need to pass three steps. Why? Once you've reached the AM-approved
stage, you've already got:
- a good review by an existing developer (advocate)
- an assurance from a person very experienced with Debian and with
handling new developers
- a proof of identity
Well, I could understand that it's desired to have one last check by a
third person at the end of the whole process. But why do the FD and DAM
have to check separately?
And why is approval by DAM not equal to account creation? It seems to me
that the account creation step could be fully automated: checking the box
"approved by DAM" could trigger an insert into the LDAP database thereby
creating the account.
Thijs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| | |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| * Thijs Kinkhorst (kink@squirrelmail.org) [050802 12:19]:
> And why is approval by DAM not equal to account creation? It seems to me
> that the account creation step could be fully automated: checking the box
> "approved by DAM" could trigger an insert into the LDAP database thereby
> creating the account.
because that would mean that the php-script has root access to the ldap
database, which is equivalent to be root on all debian.org-machines.
Also, the nm.d.o-pages don't have all necessary information for the
account.
Actually creating the account in the LDAP is BTW not taking as much time
as you might consider, it is just that only very few persons have the
privilege to change such information in the ldap database for obvious
reasons.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| | |
| Thijs Kinkhorst 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| On Tue, August 2, 2005 13:11, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>
> It would be nice if all advocates would actually check that the
> applicant is apt to become a developer: The high number of rejections
> (by the AM) shows that this doesn't work.
This is more of an education question then: how do we make sure advocates
know what they're doing? Maybe an advocate has to give some "proof", e.g.
"I've co-maintained package x with this candidate for months and he did a
good job" or "I've sponsored quite some uploads and all these packages
were well done". Is there feedback provided to those advocates who approve
bad prospects?
>
> Right, because all AMs are very experienced with new developers, as they
> have all processed like 20 applicants or so in 4 months.
I don't see how you can think that I ever claimed that.
>
> Because the FD checks that the report is formally OK (and also gives a
> bit of feedback to the AM and applicant), while the DAM checks from a
> "Do we want to give a security hole to this applicant" point of view.
I don't see how this explains that these tasks can't be done by a single
group of people. If you're checking a report out, you could either check
some points and leave other points to be checked by another part of the
process, or just check the whole thing at once. The last one makes more
sense to me.
>
> (1) Account creation needs a bit more than that, as the applicant's key
> needs to be added to the keyring
> (2) WTF? You want to give LDAP write access to a php script?
You don't have to give the script write access to accomplish that. You
could also use a pull system that periodically (nightly?) checks which new
developers have been approved and add them from that side.
And even then, appearently the DAM works like this: I approve person X,
let's check his box, but I'll add the account at some point later on (this
takes weeks on average). When you check the box you might add the account
aswell when you're at it, right?
Or what about this: as DAM, I've checked his application, everything OK,
so I create the account. The NM-system will then show DAM-approved for
this candidate.
Thijs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Frederico Rodrigues Abraham 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| i tried once or twice to volunteer, but i failed... i don't remember why
just my two cents
-- Fred
On 8/2/05, Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote:
> * Thijs Kinkhorst (kink@squirrelmail.org) [050802 13:41]:
his[vbcol=seagreen]
nt[vbcol=seagreen]
>=20
> Just that the person who checks the reports is not root in Debian's ldap
> system. So, one person checks the reports, and then marks it on the web
> pages and sends mail to another person who then adds the accounts.
>=20
>=20
> Cheers,
> Andi
>=20
>=20
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian=
..org
>=20
>=20
--=20
-- Fred
| |
| Andreas Barth 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| * Thijs Kinkhorst (kink@squirrelmail.org) [050802 13:41]:
> And even then, appearently the DAM works like this: I approve person X,
> let's check his box, but I'll add the account at some point later on (this
> takes weeks on average). When you check the box you might add the account
> aswell when you're at it, right?
Just that the person who checks the reports is not root in Debian's ldap
system. So, one person checks the reports, and then marks it on the web
pages and sends mail to another person who then adds the accounts.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thijs Kinkhorst 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| On Tue, August 2, 2005 13:44, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Thijs Kinkhorst (kink@squirrelmail.org) [050802 13:41]:
>
> Just that the person who checks the reports is not root in Debian's ldap
> system. So, one person checks the reports, and then marks it on the web
> pages and sends mail to another person who then adds the accounts.
Is this a bug or a feature?
THijs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Gustavo Noronha Silva 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| Em Ter, 2005-08-02 Ã_s 04:46 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko escreveu:
> Then I have a better idea... It seems to me that any DD-professional is capable
> of performing AM duties, isn't it? Then I would say it might make sense
> to send an announcement to any DD with experience over X month and Y
> packages maintained if they want to be just considered for AM process.
I think I have an even better idea! It would be very nice if people
would only voice their opinions on a problem after getting in touch with
the affected part of Debian for some time, having felt this way its real
problems and needs.
The amount of non-feasible and non-helpful ideas being thrown in the air
these days just seems to be very big. That certainly makes debian-devel
a PITA to read.
Nothing personal, nothing specific about you, this is just a random
selected message to reply with my small suggestion.
See ya,
--
kov@debian.org: Gustavo Noronha <http://people.debian.org/~kov>
Debian: <http://www.debian.org> * <http://www.debian-br.org>
| |
| Tomas Fasth 2005-08-02, 7:52 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Barth skrev:
> * Thijs Kinkhorst (kink@squirrelmail.org) [050802 13:41]:
>
>
>
> Just that the person who checks the reports is not root in Debian's ldap
> system.
There is delegation and group access available in OpenLDAP. So, one
would not need to have write access to the whole directory tree,
only to the necessary branches. Also, this could very well be
handled the same way as .commands on ftp-master.d.o, that is, by
requiring valid signatures of ldap commands in ldif format from a
limited number of people operating on a restricted part of the ldap
tree.
Just a thought, no flames please
// Tomas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFC726ywYdzVZ/ o1QQRAv8tAJ9gBsOJ6j+xqL1wR1ezmtsnnzFxvgC
faKFE
zy5shd7inv3al0LliXc6XcY=
=hUtq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Shachar Shemesh 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>Indeed to do THE WORK it is not necessary to be a DD. It is just that
>for upload of packages into debian non-DD needs to interact with a
>sponsor. Also administrativa like voting can't be done by non-DD.
>Besides that I don't see any difficulties as to do packaging and
>to interact_with/influence the debian community
>
>
This is free software. Personally, my kicks come from knowing people use
what I've done. The long delays involved with sponsored uploads, and
even more when new packages are involved, are hurting the fun, and
ultimately, the incentive to contribute.
Don't get me wrong. I am not in the least bit resentful to my sponsor
when things get slow. I realize full well he is also busy, and has other
things to do. Isn't that just the point, though? I wish to become a DD,
not because I don't think I can get my packages into Debian otherwise,
but because I want to help the project. It seems that the lack of time
everybody has is a self aggravating problem. No time -> Longer time to
approve new DDs -> People have no time.
Shachar
--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andrew Suffield 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| It's a pretty theory but it fails to account for reality.
On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 12:18:08PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tue, August 2, 2005 10:28, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> While I can agree that there are too few AMs, the whole process itself
> seems pretty bureaucratic with room for improvement. Once you've completed
> the AM stage, this still has to happen:
> - AM checks application.
> - Front Desk checks application.
> - DAM checks application.
> - DAM creates account.
>
> (Source: nm.debian.org)
>
> So, once the AM, who has done a thorough review of the candidate, then you
> still need to pass three steps. Why? Once you've reached the AM-approved
> stage, you've already got:
> - a good review by an existing developer (advocate)
Advocates are utterly useless. Anybody, absolutely *anybody*, no
matter how much of a stupid MCSE-waving windows nutcase they might be,
can get advocated, and people do routinely get advocated who have no
hope of passing.
The flaw in the system is simple and obvious: in order to get
advocated, you must find precisely one developer in a thousand who
thinks they should sent a brief fluffy mail about you.
> - an assurance from a person very experienced with Debian and with
> handling new developers
AMs aren't much better, as a group. The FD checks their applications
so as not to waste the DAM's time reviewing bogus ones, and the DAM
checks them to filter out people who shouldn't get in. The reason why
we need both these checks is most simply explained by pointing out
that both of them reject a significant number of applicants - if we
didn't have them, people would get in who shouldn't, or the DAM's
already limited time would be wasted, slowing the process down more.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
| |
| Petter Reinholdtsen 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| [Andrew Suffield]
> AMs aren't much better, as a group. The FD checks their applications
> so as not to waste the DAM's time reviewing bogus ones, and the DAM
> checks them to filter out people who shouldn't get in. The reason
> why we need both these checks is most simply explained by pointing
> out that both of them reject a significant number of applicants - if
> we didn't have them, people would get in who shouldn't, or the DAM's
> already limited time would be wasted, slowing the process down more.
You seem to assume that all rejections are correct, and get rid of
some people which should not be accepted as debian developers, while
all approvals are suspect and might let through a person which should
have been rejected. Is this correct?
Do you have any good arguments why it isn't the other way around, that
some of the rejections get rid of people which could have done a great
job as a debian developer?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Russ Allbery 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> writes:
> [Andrew Suffield]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You seem to assume that all rejections are correct, and get rid of some
> people which should not be accepted as debian developers, while all
> approvals are suspect and might let through a person which should have
> been rejected. Is this correct?
> Do you have any good arguments why it isn't the other way around, that
> some of the rejections get rid of people which could have done a great
> job as a debian developer?
Have you read the reasons for holds and rejections at the FD and DAM
stage?
Really, folks, quite a bit of this information is public. I admit that,
being in NM myself, I have had more reason to go poking around on the web
site and reading up on various records, but it's worth spending some time
on the site before participating in these sorts of threads.
Like Andrew says, the three stages of checks are only pointless
bureaucracy if the last two steps are rubber stamps. As you can see
clearly from the NM site, they're not. Given that, you have to dig a
little deeper and figure out why people may get all the way through the AM
stage but still not get approved.
Looking at the records on the site, you'll find that, of the three current
front desk holds, two are for incomplete skills testing and one is for a
key problem. Particularly given the rest of this thread and the desire to
see more people jump in to be AMs, you do need this sort of check by a
third party. Not all AMs are experienced; not all AMs are going to
remember everything.
Looking at the DAM holds, you'll see that most of them are for lack of
activity. Now, you might argue (reasonably) that the current extended
length of the process is partly to blame for that, but on the other hand,
joining Debian really is a committment. While I wouldn't say that it's as
easy to participate in Debian without being a DD as some of the other
folks on this list, it most certainly is possible. I'll also point out
that, for every other Open Source project I've been involved in, it's
taken at *least* a year of steady activity on the project and regular
patch submission before I got direct commit access. I wouldn't expect
Debian to be that different.
I do think that the amount of time NM takes at the moment is a bit too
long, but I don't think it should be quick. I think it's important to
verify that people really *want* to be DDs before approving them, and
while sheer time lag isn't necessarily the most friendly way of doing
this, it can still be rather effective.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thijs Kinkhorst 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 15:24 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> The FD checks their applications
> so as not to waste the DAM's time reviewing bogus ones, and the DAM
> checks them to filter out people who shouldn't get in.
Your statement rests on the assuption that somehow the DAM's time is
more valuable than the FD's time. If we would just make everyone
currently in FD a DAM, then then the check could be done by a single
person.
To be perfectly clear - I don't object to the checks per se, but rather
to those checks being done by different institutions. Andreas Barth
wrote in this thread:
> So, one person checks the reports, and then marks it on the web pages
> and sends mail to another person who then adds the accounts.
Please explain how this isn't overly cumbersome.
Currently a report passes through FD, then to DAM-not-authorised, and
finally to DAM-authorised. What if these groups would be melted into
one, and each member could take an incoming application, review it, and
either reject or approve the account?
Thijs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Olaf van der Spek 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| On 8/2/05, Thijs Kinkhorst <kink@squirrelmail.org> wrote:
> Currently a report passes through FD, then to DAM-not-authorised, and
> finally to DAM-authorised. What if these groups would be melted into
> one, and each member could take an incoming application, review it, and
> either reject or approve the account?
Multiple persons often see more bugs/error/mistakes/whatever then one perso=
n.
Won't this decrease 'quality'?
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| | |
| Andrew Suffield 2005-08-02, 6:06 pm |
| On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 04:36:28PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Do you have any good arguments why it isn't the other way around, that
> some of the rejections get rid of people which could have done a great
> job as a debian developer?
How about 'not second guessing people without cause'? I'm not going to
argue that the rejections being made are bad ones. If you are, this is
the wrong place to do it. If you're not, then you don't have a point
here.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-08-02, 9:02 pm |
| On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 03:01:39PM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Andreas Barth skrev:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> There is delegation and group access available in OpenLDAP. So, one
> would not need to have write access to the whole directory tree,
> only to the necessary branches.
I'm amused that you think there's anything in Debian's LDAP directory
*besides the user accounts themselves that you're proposing to give people
access to* that would warrant this level of granular access control.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Tomas Fasth 2005-08-03, 7:51 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Steve Langasek skrev:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 03:01:39PM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote:
> I'm amused that you think there's anything in Debian's LDAP
> directory *besides the user accounts themselves that you're
> proposing to give people access to* that would warrant this level
> of granular access control.
I'm equally amused that you think there isn't.
tomfa@gluck:~$ ldapsearch -x objectclass=* | grep dn: | cut -d ' '
- -f 2- | sort | uniq -t = -W 1
cn=LDAP Administrator,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
dc=debian,dc=org
gid=Debian,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
host=auric,ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org
ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org
uid=93sam,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
Thijs suggested to allow the DAM to create the account directly
instead of just passing the stick on to yet another person causing
yet more delays. You were implying that it can't be done without
root access which I interpreted as giving write access to the whole
database. My assertion was that it can be done by giving DAM write
access to a specific branch in the tree, in this case the
"ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org" branch.
If it can be done and you just refuse do do it that way then say so
instead of expressing amusement based on unfair generalisations.
And if you feel uncomfortable to give DAM write access to
ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org directly, then let DAM create new accounts
in a sandbox node from where entries can be moved to the right
place by a cron script that can be programmed to make sure no
existing accounts is tampered with.
- --
Tomas Fasth <tomfa@debian.org>
GnuPG Fingerprint: DC7B 9453 7F26 1BF9 6B21 9F90 C187 7355 9FE8 D504
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFC8KLjwYdzVZ/ o1QQRApcRAJ4l4Pct4DdYI1X0ccrEkFCRrKq+ggC
fbR5F
vFNBPPdDTlpFAQI0ksRUsRs=
=lv/i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-08-03, 7:51 am |
| On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 12:56:36PM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote:
> Steve Langasek skrev:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm equally amused that you think there isn't.
> tomfa@gluck:~$ ldapsearch -x objectclass=* | grep dn: | cut -d ' '
> - -f 2- | sort | uniq -t = -W 1
> cn=LDAP Administrator,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
> dc=debian,dc=org
> gid=Debian,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
> host=auric,ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org
> ou=hosts,dc=debian,dc=org
> uid=93sam,ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org
And which of these are you claiming it's worthwhile to protect from someone
who has write access to the user DNs?
I know quite well what data is stored in the LDAP directory, and I can't
think of anything else that holds a candle to the amount of damage that
person could do by editing the attributes on user DNs.
> Thijs suggested to allow the DAM to create the account directly
> instead of just passing the stick on to yet another person causing
> yet more delays. You were implying that it can't be done without
> root access
I did not. Kindly re-read your own quote markers above.
> which I interpreted as giving write access to the whole
> database.
More likely, the implication is that giving someone the necessary write
access to LDAP is *equivalent* to giving them root access on the Debian
servers.
> And if you feel uncomfortable to give DAM write access to
> ou=users,dc=debian,dc=org directly, then let DAM create new accounts
> in a sandbox node from where entries can be moved to the right
> place by a cron script that can be programmed to make sure no
> existing accounts is tampered with.
You'd need more sanity checking than just preventing tampering with existing
accounts. In any case, I hardly think it would be worth the effort.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Bastian Blank 2005-08-03, 7:51 am |
| On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 04:12:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> More likely, the implication is that giving someone the necessary write
> access to LDAP is *equivalent* to giving them root access on the Debian
> servers.
No, only if the person is allowed to write the uidNumber entry.
> You'd need more sanity checking than just preventing tampering with existing
> accounts. In any case, I hardly think it would be worth the effort.
I have such a setup running. There are some people which are allowed to
add items to the tree which are converted to real user objects by a
script. They are not allowed to set uids/gids and generate groups.
Bastian
--
Pain is a thing of the mind. The mind can be controlled.
-- Spock, "Operation -- Annihilate!" stardate 3287.2
|
|
|
|
|