On 07/02/2010 11:14 PM, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> Which is true, and it would probably be a good idea to clarify wording >> that refers to Debian Members, since that's not the terminology that we >> use in general and, with the existence of DMs, it can be confusing. > Nowadays, we're asking people to become Maintainers so that they can > become Debian Maintainers and *then* apply to the New Maintainer's > process so that they can become Debian Developers. > > Am I the only one who has trouble -and getting laughed at- whenever I > try to explain these to potential contributors? > > Can we _at least_ rename the NM process to be indicative of what it is?
I gues if we start renaming, we should do it properly. (and I think the first really faulty thing was to choose the name Debian Maintainers as maintainer is too widely used..., even maintainer and 'New Maintainer' is confusing enough) -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c2e62f2.3040...@bzed.de
