Hmm, IIRC nmarques left the project because of not so nice wordings by you.
[[BR]]
(Summary over [http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-August/171152.html here] and [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847604#c22 here])
[[BR]]
Are your problems resolved now?

Yes. Want him to be a comaintainer of MATE too now. He has reactivated his account.

As Dan's sponsor, I'll opt-out of voting. I will say that I am pleased with his progress both as a packager and collaborator, and think he would make a good sponsor.

I'm not pleased at all of the initial conversations/happenings around MATE.[[BR]]
As people can learn and improve collaboration (which seems to have happened according to rdieter),[[BR]]
other sponsors (who may have been more involved in the recent activity)[[BR]]
should further decide on this.[[BR]]
[[BR]]
+/-0

I concur with tomspur. I have not appreciated comments such as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847604#c22, but people can change and therefore I let people that have been more recently involved with Dan express their opinion.

+/- 0

Replying to [comment:5 pingou]:

I concur with tomspur. I have not appreciated comments such as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847604#c22, but people can change and therefore I let people that have been more recently involved with Dan express their opinion.

Yes, I remember on this, too... Well, could be that he is more collaborative now. Could be...

However, if I look on his reviews, I see a couple for MATE, and just three for non-MATE packages. Although we don't speak about approve him as a provenpackager, I would expect some more and wider spread reviews (in terms of software types).

Therefore, I'm undecided. Just my five cents, no more than that.

+/-0 as well.

In fact, I sponsored nmarquez about 6 months ago, and I'd do that again.

Currently, I'm counting 10 fully finished reviews (package was pushed and the review wasn't closed as wontfix). Shortly skipping through that list, you have done two reviews by hand, the other 8 were done by simply running fedora-review and copying its results to the web-form.

Hi all,

I had a small misunderstanding with Dan and in fact I did got a bit affected by a few of his words; With time Dan proved to be a smart fellow with a very interesting sense of humor. Throughout the last months I've been talking with him and other contributors on #mate @ FreeNode and there isn't really much I can add to what others have stated before, I fully endorse all the positive remarks made by other participants on this ticket.

Dan invited me to help him out maintaining MATE; alongside with Leigh Scott we've been swapping experiences and working together to improve MATE packaging/deployment together (they in Fedora, I in openSUSE). It's been an awesome experience and I salute everyone for giving him a second chance, it for sure payed off.

I wish Dan the best of luck persuing his objectives as a packages and community member. For the most, all I can say to reinforce my position is that Dan fought adversities and never backed down (unlike me), this is by far an important detail.

My vote is positive, but my participation here should qualitative and not quantitative.

NM

PS: I do have a uncommon kind of temper, short fused and temperamental. So it's not only Dan's fault, but also mine, therefore, consider it also.

I'd asked nmarquez to comment here, and he's explained the situation to my satisfaction.

+1

-1

I think it would be good for Dan to do more reviews by hand, not by just running fedora-review. There are a lot of things that fedora-review will not catch.

I can and plan to do plenty more reviews by hand. That was part of my reasoning to apply to become a sponsor. If doing more reviews by hand is what it takes I have no problem doing that. It's just that a lot of the pending reviews will need sponsors.

-1

I concur with [comment:10 nb]

Replying to [comment:11 vicodan]:

I can and plan to do plenty more reviews by hand. That was part of my reasoning to apply to become a sponsor.

You can easily do reviews without being a sponsor. I see a major progress in (and not limited to) packaging, but really can't vote for you to become a sponsor, yet.

Currently, I'm counting two non-copy-and-paste reviews, the guideline says:

• Have done five high quality, nontrivial package reviews.

so, playing devils advocate: -1 from me.

Okay will do more high quality reviews and reapply.