On 25/06/09 at 17:45 +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 02:43:53PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > I said that I considered some people ready to start NM, because I was > > sure that they would be perfectly ready to be a DD by the end of the NM > > process (i.e a year and a half later, basically), and that they would be > > good NM applicants (modulo the usual delays and motivation problems). > > You considered people ready to start NM while the project did not (i.e. > they were not ready by the time they applied, as required by the > project).
Let's look at what the documentation says. on nmadvocate.php, it is said: Please advocate an applicant only if you are sure that he or she is prepared and capable to become a Debian Developer. it's "become", not "be". But then, on the guidelines page (http://www.debian.org/devel/join/nm-advocate.en.html), it is said: "http://www.debian.org/devel/join/nm-advocate.en.html"; Also, the advocation email asks the following questions: Why do you advocate this person? (please provide a 5-10 line summary). How have they contributed to Debian already? What do they intend to do for Debian in the future? How do they interact with others, such as users and other developers? So it doesn't ask anything directly about the capacity of the applicant to be a DD. If the consensus is really that people should be ready to *be* DDs the day they are advocated, I think that those various documents should be clarified. Also, public advocacy (as in DM) might help to improve the situation, since it would allow others to say "uh, I'm not quite sure he should enter NM as soon as this", and would also encourage advocates to send high-quality advocation emails. > Just two people is really a bad set to draw any conclusions from. I > would appreciate if you would acknowledge that advocating people early > will be a problem for the NM process and for Debian in general in the > long term, and should not be done. > > Basically, you're putting yourself above those other DDs who are being > ignored by Front-Desk for early advocating on the premise that your > judgement would be perfect. No, you are putting myself under the other DDs because I said that I advocated two applicants that I didn't consider ready to be a DD the next day, only ready to become a DD. Apparently, so far my judgement has been correct. Since you take this personal, let's look at your advocations. Of course, nobody is going to complain about Cyril Brulebois. On the other hand, Daniel Leidert was advocated by you on 2008-09-22, got an AM on 2009-01-23, passed the ID check on 2009-01-25, and then didn't complete P&P or T&S, as recorded on [1] (he is currently on hold). One could draw the conclusion that you advocated him a bit early, since apparently he wasn't ready to complete the NM process quickly. [1] https://nm.debian.org/nmstatus.php?email=daniel.leidert%40wgdd.de However, it would be more reasonable to acknowledge that most DDs (you and I included) just advocate people when they are prepared to go through NM and very likely to succeed. But then, things happen, and sometimes the NM process can take a long time even for very good candidates (Cyril's took 22 months), because of bored/frustrated applicants, or busy AMs/FDs/DAMs. -- | 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
