On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:52:11PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> But I know that there are/will be DDs which do infrastructure stuff only, and
> rarely upload packages. Such DDs should never be regarded as MIA, of course.
I am not convinced of this. Infrastructure contributions are necessary and
On Fri, Jul 24 2009, Kevin Mark wrote:
> If someone goes through the arduious process of becomeing a DD:
> proving their knowledge of:
> a. FLOSS ideals,
> b. Debian ideals,
> c. FLOSS legal ideas,
> d. computer languages,
> e. social skills
> f. and patience to wait for various approvals, ac
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:38:58AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 06:49:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > I have nothing against this in principle, but how is this any
> > > different from the peo
Ben Finney writes:
> Let ideas stand or fall on their merits, and let no person feel they
> cannot separate themselves from an idea. Ideas are not sacred: There is
> no such thing as an idea that should be defended from criticism or even
> ridicule.
s/defended from/sheltered from/
--
\
Charles Plessy writes:
> I hesitated between answering in public or private, but since there
> are planned discussions at Debconf about aggressivity on the mailing
> lists, I will do it in public.
What is meant here by “aggressivity”? I think there's an important
distinction to be made here, bet
Le Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:30:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>
> While I do not approve of ad hominem attacks on the mailing
> list, I think that we can go over much to the other side: We should not
> be overly genteel about silly ideas.
You twist people words and extrapolate to
On Thu, Jul 23 2009, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
>> (Are you referring here to package teams, or infrastructure teams?)
>
> I doubt that packaging teams are a problem here, I'd imagine that
> every DD uploads a package one a year anyway. But I know that there
> are/will be DDs w
On Thu, Jul 23 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:44:01PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>>
>> his is silly
>
> In case you had any doubt about it, let me confirm: it hurts to read
> that kind of answer.
> It does not help, nor bring any useful element to the di
Le Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 03:44:01PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>
> his is silly
Manoj,
I hesitated between answering in public or private, but since there are planned
discussions at Debconf about aggressivity on the mailing lists, I will do it in
public.
In case you had any doubt
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:52:20AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
>> My opinion in two short comments:
>
>> - reduce the time to 1 year
>
> This introduces the possibility that, even if the DD votes in every election
> and uploads their packages once per release cycle, the
On Wed, Jul 22 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If it's going to be automated, does it behoove us to also send
> automated mails to DDs that are getting close to the two-year limit,
> warning them? Or is it your view that 2 years without activity is so
> far beyond what's reasonable that there's no
On Wed, Jul 22 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> Personnaly, I would not mind a more stringent mechanism, for instance
> defining activity as changing one’s LDAP password once per year. Or if
> we want to be fancy, we could count time not in years but in
> releases. Releases are the greatest events
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:34:34PM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:12:24PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > Still, I'd prefer not to have to write such specific details on the
> > text we are going to vote on. I propose to leave such details to DAM /
> > DSA, would you
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 04:12:24PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Still, I'd prefer not to have to write such specific details on the
> text we are going to vote on. I propose to leave such details to DAM /
> DSA, would you be fine with that?
I don't think it's worth voting on anything so vagu
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:17:19PM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I think that the time framework is large enough not to have a
> > warning.
> One of the reasons I think it would be useful to have warnings is
> that there are other ways in which DDs may be constantly
> contributing (e.g., contrib
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:56:00PM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:52:20AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
> > My opinion in two short comments:
>
> > - reduce the time to 1 year
>
> This introduces the possibility that, even if the DD votes in every election
> and u
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:26:45AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:38:58AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > If it's going to be automated, does it behoove us to also send
> > automated mails to DDs that are getting close to the two-year limit,
> > warning them? Or is
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:52:20AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> My opinion in two short comments:
> - reduce the time to 1 year
This introduces the possibility that, even if the DD votes in every election
and uploads their packages once per release cycle, they'll be MIAed out of
Debian - if one
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 23/07/09 at 10:52 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * DDs which are not active for 2 years or more automatically loose
>>> vote and upload rights.
>>>
>>> * Ac
On 23/07/09 at 10:52 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > * DDs which are not active for 2 years or more automatically loose
> > vote and upload rights.
> >
> > * Activity is defined as no
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 06:03:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>
> * DDs which are not active for 2 years or more automatically loose
> vote and upload rights.
>
> * Activity is defined as not having neither voted n
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>
> * DDs which are not active for 2 years or more automatically loose
> vote and upload rights.
>
> * Activity is defined as not having neither voted nor signed any
> upload (in the past 2 y
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
* DDs which are not active for 2 years or more automatically loose
vote and upload rights.
* Activity is defined as not having neither voted nor signed any
^Inactivity probably.
upload (in the past 2 years).
Just for comparison, the developer's reference als
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:38:58AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If it's going to be automated, does it behoove us to also send
> automated mails to DDs that are getting close to the two-year limit,
> warning them? Or is it your view that 2 years without activity is
> so far beyond what's reasona
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 02:19:38AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is the correct approach to that problem: It
> doesn't take in account maintainers that are not DDs, and that can
> also become MIA. But it could be used in addition to other
> approaches.
Fair enough, that's act
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 06:49:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > I have nothing against this in principle, but how is this any
> > different from the people who manage the MIA database?
> The main difference is the automatio
26 matches
Mail list logo
