On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 08:33:20PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote: > > * confirmed that the New Maintainer successfully passed the ID-, T&S- > > and P&P check > > I think this is the wrong time. My opinion of current T&S is that it's > completely on crack, I mean, okay, if one is going to package a library, > he will have to learn what it means. But how many people are indeed > packaging libraries ? Not _that_ many. I won't never ever touch a perl > package, and am unlikely to package a ruby extension.
The T&S section's format is entirely up to the AM; lots of AMs use the current T&S format because it's easier for them and it at least makes sure that the NM knows where to find the answers to the questions that are asked and is reasonably aware of the issues entailed therein. > A regular work of his NM, watched carefully, is a better T&S that > what is done right now. While I can't speak for all AMs, I track what my applicants have done before I recommend them to become DDs; T&S is just one tool that I use. Finally, the ability of maintainers to upload their own packages without being a DD isn't an attempt to improve the NM process; it's an attempt to allow people to contribute who may not actually want to become DDs. Under Antony's proposal, NMs can become DMs at any point that their AM feels they are ready, be that after T&S, or P&P or whenever. Don Armstrong -- Junkies were all knitted together in a loose global macrame, the intercontinental freemasonry of narcotics. -- Bruce Sterling, _Holy Fire_ p257 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
