On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 02:36:15PM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:21:21PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > I didn't think that using the templates was required for AMs, merely a > > > useful tool. I think AMs should be able to check to their satisfaction > > > in other ways as appropriate, as long as it produces a similar result > > > (you are happy that the candidate _does_ know all those things and > > > will probably get them right in practice). > > > > For example, my AM mostly did not use templates for my application. > > However, doing it that way is quite a bit more work for the AM. > > True, especially given that the AM has to ensure that the applicant > conforms not only to the standards (s)he desires, but also to the > expectations of FD and DAM. It's not surprising that people prefer the > templates, given this situation, plus some extra tasks for the > applicant.
Yes. When I was an AM (long time ago) I tried to use standard questions as less as possible, and preferred to discuss with the applicant how (s)he would handle certain problems, either ones that I had made up, or something from the packaging problems I had experienced with my own packages. I found that much more interesting, certainly for me, and I hope also for the applicant. Until I discovered that the FD-at-that-time went back to the applicant after I had submitted my report and asked additional questions from the standard list. I think it was because the DAM-at-that-time wa not happy with my style. That is when I quit being an AM. -Ralf. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
