Re: Suggestion: Time limit for NM process
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 02:40:37PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> So, your recommendation is to implement a parallel NM process to the
> existing one and prove that it is better? I doubt that it would make *any*
> sense when the DAMs won't accept the outcome of that process and this is
> *very* unlikely. :)
*You* started talking about "nothing can get done in Debian, because
everybody shoots down my proposals".
Obviously the easiest way to change the NM process is to become AM,
process lots of applicants compared to the others (this might be easy
right now, as there are not so many AMs it seems) and gradually shift
the application process to your likings. Once you're the king-of-AMs,
other AMs will follow your advise more likely than when you're in the NM
queue.
Also obviously, this takes quite some work.
(and this is not directed at Ingo specifically, but rather to anybody
who wants to improve the NM process)
> > I don't see how this side-issue is connected to the discussion of the NM
> > process, maybe you could take it to -project?
>
> It's related to proposals of improving the NM process. When proposed
> improvments are put done here, why take it to -project? To get them put down
> there as well? Makes no sense to me.
See above, if you want to complain about general proposals getting
rejected by Debian in general, do so on -project (if at all).
> BTW: how's the cron issue going on hurd-i386? Is it already fixed on your
> buildd? ;)
How the hell is that connected to this discussion?
Michael
Reply to: