Hi Steffen, On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 04:05:57PM +0200, Steffen Joeris wrote:
> I'd like to offer an alternative gr proposal. I read the whole thread (took > me > most of the night :( ) and after some discussions on IRC, I come up with this > proposal. > I took ajs proposal and modified it to fit my understanding of DM. See the > patch below the proposal, together with my comments for more information. > I avoid repeating most of the arguments, which were send several times in > dozens of mails. This is just my proposal and let's see, if some people want > to support it, or if we just forget about it :) I see the following weaknesses in your proposal compared with AJ's: - Only people who are going through NM qualify. This reduces the set of maintainers benefitting from it to those who have the time, interest, and skill to go through an NM process which is deliberately heavyweight *because* it's used for brokering access to DD status. - Commit access to the keyring is only granted to those individuals who are already part of the NM process. This is effectively a conflict of interest; while I agree that the DAM and FD should have access to the DM keyring, particularly for the purpose of revoking privileges of people who they believe shouldn't be able to upload packages on their own, if they're the *only* ones with access to the DM keyring then any time spent adding DMs is time taken away from adding DDs. Aside from not addressing all the use cases of the original proposal, I can't imagine the setup you've described actually getting enough use to be worth ratifying. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
