Re: Initial draft proposed consitutution (v0.1)
Ian Jackson <leader@debian.org> wrote:
> <URL:http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/debian-organisation.html>
>
> Please comment on it - here on debian-devel, please, rather than by
> private email.
(1) I don't see anything about testing this mechanism before committing
to it. I'd like to see something along this line. Perhaps only that
we have a suspension of rules for one week to obtain a consensus on
how it's working -- perhaps after using it for a month, and again after
a year?
(2) It seems to have a flaw: it assumes that we can know who the
developers are. Since we never meet, I'm not sure this is a valid
assumption. It would be fairly easy, for instance, for somone to set
up multiple email addresses, multiple pgp keys, and maintain multiple
packages (one from each account). [Personally, I have a variety of
email addresses in a variety of domains, though I've never used them in
this fashion.] Another risk is inert memberships: does the whole thing
come grinding to a halt if we have a lot of developers who are only
occasionally active? Having deadlines and procedures is probably good,
putting much significance on counting ids probably isn't.
Or maybe we don't care?
(3) The technical committee's voting requirements do not make sense.
First, the "Standard Resolution Procedure" seems designed for
potentially controversial decisions involving a large number of people
-- the technical committee has a maximum of 8. Also, technical decisions
are better handled using the "rough consensus and working code" model,
in my opinion. Second, there's no minimum time for the vote to take
place, no minimum number of people required to vote -- how is this
supposed to work?
I'll take another look at this after I sleep on it.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: