Hi Paul On 2020/03/19 15:19, Paul Wise wrote: > 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.
Yes, the above part is the part we definitely agreed on. > 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? I don't think so. In my case, I was persuing the path of DM -> DD. Adding the extra step of DM -> DM and Non-uploading DD -> Uploading DD would probably not have happened much faster and probably would just have wasted a few people's time. I think at the time (2016) there were also some problems if you wanted to be both a DM and a non-uploading DD so I skipped that complication. But yes, in general, I think the time it takes is why people don't immediately go for it. That's not too say the process is too long or cumbersome, even if it's just a 2 day process, when you're neck-deep in DebConf matters, you're going to put your focus there until you have some time to focus on the NM process. In Bernelle's case, she's applying for non-uploading DD and is going through the NM process so it's again just a time thing, and I think it's just one of those things that's not really a big deal. > 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? Non-uploading DD's existed at the time, I just had no interest in becoming a non-uploading DD when it was already my intent to become an uploading DD. Back in 2016 we were already doing a lot of work to bridge more of those historical disconnects between Debian and Debconf, so that wasn't a factor at all. Again, I didn't perceive the process as heavyweight per sé, but I was doing a lot of different Debian work and did become a DD 7 months later. I know it's not a record time but I didn't feel a need to rush it either. No one ever had a problem with me being a non-DD on the DebConf committee and it wasn't any kind of secret either. I was involved when the DPL and DebConf people talked about it, they simply agreed that it's not an issue and that you don't have to be a DD in order to be on the DebConf committee. TBH I'm having trouble following your line of questioning and exactly what you're concerned about, if I missed something, please ask again and keep it to one question per paragraph. -Jonathan -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jcc> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.
