On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > Neil Williams wrote: > > The work of those DD's is constantly reviewed and checked by other DD's > > - during mass bug filing, NMU's, bug triage etc.etc. > > And the work of non-DD contributors isn't?
Not in the same way, no. Most non-DD contributions that actually affect the archive always go through a DD gatekeeper. At the end of the day, that DD is the person who is actually responsible. > We need to trust in that the people, who ever got DD, are trust > worth. If we do not, then a community and the good work like it is > can't be kept up. That's actually backwards from what I've said. My argument is not that DDs should be trusted, but that DDs are in a position where they can abuse that trust. The longer they've been a DD (and the more work they do) the less and less likely they are to do so (at least intentionally). > It is just not realizable to ongoing examine if DD stayed actual > with current policies or their interest. It's easier to tell[1] which developers are current with what is happening in Debian (assuming they're active) than it is to tell whether an NM applicant is. Don Armstrong 1: by looking at the packages they upload, the bugs that they have open, and the bugs which have been filed -- Grimble left his mother in the food store and went to the launderette and watched the clothes go round. It was a bit like colour television only with less plot. -- Clement Freud _Grimble_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
