Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > The Debian Project endorses the concept of "Debian Maintainers" with > limited access, and resolves to
s/resolves to/resolves/ # "resolves to a new keyring will be created"? > 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring". > It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring > tool, with commit priveleges initially assigned to: s/be initially maintained/initially be maintained/ # grr, adverb! s/be.*, with/have/ # I don't think method should be specified that much. s/priveleges/privileges/ # unless other countries spell it like that > * the Debian Account Managers (Joerg Jaspert, James Troup) > * the New-maintainer Front Desk (Christoph Berg, Marc Brockschmidt, > Brian Nelson) > * the FTP masters (James Troup, Ryan Murray, Anthony Towns) > * the Debian Keyring maintenaners (James Troup, Michael Beattie) > * the Jetring developers (Joey Hess, Anthony Towns, Christoph Berg) /Jetring/d # Why should they get those powers? > > The team will be known as the Debian Maintainer Keyring team. Changes > to the team may be made by the DPL under the normal rules for > delegations. > > The keyring will be packaged for Debian, and regularly uploaded > to unstable. s/, and/ and/ # no , needed in front of and s/regularly // # meaningless - specify frequency if required > 2) The initial policy for an individual to be included in the keyring > will be: > > * that the applicant acknowledges Debian's social contract, s/acknowledges/accepts/ # is this what is meant? > free software guidelines, and machine usage policies. s/, free software guidelines,/ # part of the SC anyway > * that the applicant provides a valid gpg key, signed by a > Debian developer (and preferably connected to the web of > trust by multiple paths). > > * that at least one Debian developer (preferable more) is willing s/preferable/preferably/ > to advocate for the applicant's inclusion, in particular to the s/advocate for/advocate/ s/to the fact// # not needed > fact that the applicant is technically competent and good to work > with. > > All additions to the keyring will be publicly announced to the > debian-project list. > > 3) The initial policy for removals for the keyring will be under any of the > following circumstances: s/under any of/to remove a maintainer in/ # above doesn't make sense to me > > * the individual has become a Debian developer > * the individual has not annually reconfirmed their interest > * multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's > removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic > uploads, unfixed bugs, or being unreasonably difficult to > work with. s/the individual's// # not needed s/non-spurious reasons.*work with/good reason, such as poor uploads, \ failing to fix bugs, going MIA or being banned from debian services./ # I think any "unreasonably difficult" should get banned elsewhere. > * the Debian Account Managers have requested the individual's > removal for any reason. s/the individual's// # not needed > > 4) The initial policy for Debian developers who wish to advocate > a potential Debian maintainer will be: > > * Developers should take care in who they choose to advocate, s/in who/about who/ > particularly if they have not successfully participated as an > Application Manager, or in other mentoring roles. Advocacy should > only come after seeing the individual working effectively within > Debian, both technically and socially. s/Advocacy should.*technically and socially.// # I don't really like this paragraph because it is not instructive, but # the second sentance is bad advice IMO. It is worse than the NM # advice for advocates, suggesting it's OK to advocate a DM just because # they can operate in our current somewhat dysfunctional social mix. > * Advocacy messages should be posted to debian-newmaint or > other relevant public mailing list, and a link to that mail > provided with the application. > > * If a developer repeatedly advocates individuals who cause > problems and need to be removed, the Debian Maintainer Keyring > team may stop accepting advocacy from that developer. If the > advocacy appears to be malicious or particularly careless, the > Debian Account Managers may consider removing that developer > from the project. > > 5) The intial policy for the use of the Debian Maintainer keyring with the > Debian archive will be to accept uploads signed by a key in that keyring > provided: > > * none of the uploaded packages are NEW > > * the Maintainer: field of the uploaded .changes file matches the > key used (ie, maintainers may not sponsor uploads) s/(ie.*)/ # That's not all being in Maintainer stops: co-maintenance? > * none of the packages are being taken over from other source packages > > * the most recent version of the package uploaded to unstable > or experimental lists the uploader in the Maintainer: or Uploaders: > fields (ie, cannot NMU or hijack packages) > > * the usual checks applied to uploads from Debian developers pass > > 6) The initial relationship to the existing new-maintainer (n-m) procedure > will be as an independent means of contributing to Debian. This means, > among other things, that: > > * Applicants in the n-m queue may choose to apply to be a Debian > maintainer while finishing their application or waiting for > it to be accepted. > > * Individuals may apply to the n-m process, and pass through it > without becoming a Debian maintainer at any point. > > * Individuals may apply to become a Debian Maintainer without being > in the n-m queue, or having any intention of joining the n-m queue. > > * Appication Managers may advocate their n-m applicants but > are not required to. They may decide to only advocate applicants > who have passed some (or all) of the T&S or P&P checks. > > 7) There is no initial policy or plans for use of the keyring outside > the archive. Individuals who wish to reuse the keyring for granting > access to services to some or all Debian Maintainers may do so > according to their own judgement, of course. > > In particular, this means that Debian maintainers do not participate > in the general resolution procedure defined in the Debian constitution, > and cannot vote in Debian elections. > > ==== Debian Maintainers Proposal ==== > > Seconds, comments or amendments appreciated. In general, I think this is a useful step in the right direction towards reforming NM into something that doesn't waste so much time. I hope that you accept the above-suggested amendments and await the repost. Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
