On 14/03/09 at 19:11 +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Hi, > > if you allow me to share a thought here even though I am not a developer > and as such do not have any say in this. > > Matthew Johnson wrote: > > My goals with changing the membership procedures are: > [... snip ...] > > While the aims you list themself may be laudable to achieve > improvements, your *goal* with changing the membership procedures should > look something like > > Aid Debian to recruit skilled, cooperative, and highly dedicated new > volunteers and ensuring that Debian membership is only given to people > having these necessary qualities. > > Your idea of a good goal may vary, but ultimately, your goal should be > about membership, not process. Debian desperately lacks a vision for > developing its membership and sjould develop that to derive an adequate > process.
I totally agree with that. One way to move forward could be to list several "position statements" on Debian membership: those position statements would include information on the different aspects of membership management, without going deeply into technical details. We could then have a vote to determine which "general idea" the project want, and discuss implementation details. [...] > Mind you: comparing Debian to Ubuntu: About 50 people are in > ubuntu-core-dev (uploading to main) and about 70 more allowed to upload > to universe. Membership in teams having those permissions is subject to > expiration for inactive members. Note that renewing membership only requires to press a button on a web form. There's no verification of the activity of a developer, if I remember correctly. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
