Re: Suggestion: Time limit for NM process
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Sun, April 2, 2006 02:04, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > the latter
> > is just a matter of AMs being more agressive in putting people who are
> > taking a long time to complete the process on hold.
>
> You want to put limits on the time applicants spend in the queue,
> but how useful is this if there's no real progress at the end?
There have always been some limits on the time applicants spend in the
queue; the time at the end of the time is a function of the
availability of the DAM.
> I've tried to make everything as quick as possible, I've done all
> that I need to do. But I now need to wait for an undefined period,
> at least half a year, for no good reason.
You've only been in the FD review process for a month and ten days
now; that queue is only ~10 people long, and the DAM queue is ~15. The
reason is that your application has to be reviewed carefully by the FD
and the DAM, and any holes in your application that the AM missed
filed in.
Frankly, waiting a few months in the DAM phase isn't really a big
deal, as it allows time for the DAMs who are busy with other important
things time to resolve your application. Your AM and normal sponsors
are available to sponsor uploads to the archive anyway.[1]
> What are you doing to reduce the DAM queue?
I'm an AM. I've got applicants who are there. I don't have time to
serve as a DAM, so I've never volunteered for it.
Don Armstrong
1: I mean, I was there for 8 months, and I was still visible doing
stuff for Debian...
--
He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities, and seals them
neatly away so that they don't upset people. Nature, in fact, abhors a
lot of things, including vacuums, ships called the Marie Celeste, and
the chuck keys for electric drills.
-- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p166
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: