On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 1:09 PM Jonathan Carter wrote: > I re-read the above, my understanding is that Paul made a statement > about the non-dd process being sufficient for new delegates that should > become members, and then I agreed and re-affirmed that that should be at > least the bare minimum. I'm still not sure which question you think I > dodged, but if either you or Paul could perhaps rephrase the question > that I missed, then I'll give it another shot.
I'm saying that when we think someone deserves to be a delegate (or join a core team), then at minimum they need to go through the (non-uploading) DD process before becoming a delegate. If we trust them to be a delegate, it would be weird to not trust them enough to be a member. Is there something about the membership process (or the status itself) that makes potential delegates (and their advocates) want to skip the process or avoid being members? Did your skipping of the membership process before being a delegate happen before the non-uploading DD vote or before the non-uploading DD process was well established? Was it because of the historical perception of separation between Debian and DebConf? Did you perceive the process to be heavyweight? Did the DPL at the time and the DebConf folks just not think about this? Were there other factors I'm failing to think of? -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
