On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 04:28:41AM -0500, David Nusinow wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 09:57:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > > On 2004-07-28 03:35:31 +0100 David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > >1) MJ Ray has suggested doing more work with people in the NM queue. > > >[...] > > As should be obvious, I don't understand the NM black box. How would > > we do this? > > One thing is to modify the standard templates used for questions. Include > more licenses to critique, all of which are picked to display certain points. > I > don't know that many licenses so I can't suggest any in particular right now, > but a more focused portion of Policy & Procedures would be good. As it is, I > see the Policy & Procedures overlapping quite a bit with Tasks & Skills as > they > currently stand, so some separation would provide the necessary room in the > tests.
Having just recently come into the world of AMship, I agree with your observation regarding the overlap of some portions of T&S with P&P -- some of the questions in T&S should probably be in P&P instead, but that won't free up space in T&S for licence analysis -- that's in P&P (to some degree) already. For that matter, I'm not quite sure we should necessarily be subjecting applicants to the joys of rigorous licence analysis. We have d-legal for this purpose just so maintainers don't have to be licence experts. The question about Pine licencing is a pretty good test of basic DFSG analytical ability. > > >2) Steve McIntyre has continually suggested codifying [...] > > > > I agree with others that this is dangerous and likely to weaken the > > guidelines in nearly all cases. > > This is going to sound really bad, and I'm not trying to stir up trouble in > saying this, but perhaps the guidelines need weakening? As Matthew Garret > pointed out in another email, current interpretation of freedom is more > restrictive than that of the FSF, and I echo his point that this probably > needs to be justified. An interesting point of view. Be prepared for some brutal attacks for such a suggestion. - Matt
