On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 10:15:15PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi, Joe Wreschnig wrote: > > > >> So, it might take people 3 years, but YMMV. > > > > The problem is that the last step doesn't have an odometer, nor a gas > > gauge, thus you don't know your mileage until you arrive. > > > > Anyway, [1] states that the DAM does have a backup (joey). Apparently, > > both haven't been able to do any NM processing for the past six weeks. > > > > Might it be possible to replace the single-point-of-failure DAM with a > > Peer Review system? I.e., some DDs (the existing AMs?) are tasked with > > checking the AM reports; three(?) YES votes approves the new maintainer, > > one NO vote (with justification please...) relegates them to the DAM. > > Well, no matter what, the DAM would have to create the accounts. > However, I think the idea is good and probably would help the DAM make > his decision.
The DAM's role should not be a decision-making one. We as a project should put processes in place to make decisions regarding applicants with a documented, open process. The DAM's role should be limited to administering accounts - which would require much less in terms of time commitment and presumably would then be less likely to become backlogged. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
