Re: A weekly report?
Anand Kumria <wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au> writes:
> > > If you take up the distinction between passed to DAM / new
> > > maintainer then how about ading a 'accounts created' this week
> > > section as well.
> >
> > Err, why should that part (num/names of applicants passed to DAM)
> > of the process be special cased? I have no objection to Craig
> > taking
>
> Well the flow is: NM -> AM -> DAM. The information he has listed
> above is input to AM and outputfrom AM.
Err, no, it's not. It's input to NM and output from DAM unless
"applied to become a new maintainer" is completely counter-intuitive
and broken.
> > Subject: New Debian maintainer Robert McQueen
>
> To what list?
No list. It goes to the applicant (clearly, since it contains details
like their password) and to da-manager@debian.org.
> I note that the particular applicant, Angus Lees, I am looking at is
> listed in db.debian.org but isn't marked as a new-maintainer in the
> nm.debian.org database and does not have an account/directory on
> master or auric.
Eh? http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php shows:
I P T A N Angus Lees <gusl@cse.unsw.edu.au>
http://nm.debian.org/nmstatus.php?email=gusl@cse.unsw.edu.au also
shows him as a maintainer.
He doesn't have an account/directory on master or auric because home
directories are created on demand and accounts are dealt with via
LDAP.
> Oh, it strikes me that a field for the preferred login name /
> redirection email for -private might be handy as well. But since on
> the DAM needs that information they should say if that would be
> useful.
*shrug* I don't mind one way or the other. Obviously I do need the
information, but it doesn't help (or hinder) me any to have the
information in the database rather than the final report from the AM.
--
James
Reply to: