> In terms of rationale, I think it's clear that we do *not* have to
> package every piece of Free Software that is available to us. If we
> can't have a sensible relationship with the upstream developers, then
> I believe it would be better not to expose Debian and our users to the
> problems that will likely arise from packaging and distributing their
> software.
I am all in favor of being able to refuse the addition of software to
Debian if we know that its upstream is a troublemaker.
I am all against having this responsibility solely with FTPMaster.
I wish/hope it will end up being with a group of DDs. That group should
include FTPMaster (as we have to carry out the decision) and many DDs
From all around the project. A dozen or more, diversity==win in this
case. Even better if the group members term expire together with the
DPLs and they have to be selected and delegated again. (Ok, that
excludes FTPMaster from rotation, as we dont change that often).
And every DD can send in statements in support of other DDs (or
themself) to join the group *or* get another term, as well as getting
them out next rotation.
Or, even harder though better: The DPL or someone appointed seeks out
members each time we have an issue brought up. Not getting the same
person into the group three times in a row. (Or something like it).
Yes, this makes it difficult and lotsa work. But heck, we are going to
reject packages based on social and *NOT* technical standards. If that
gets to be an easy thing we are doing it wrong. Especially as the
perception of social standard and behaviour tends to be very different
From person to person[1], so having this be done by a large group hopefully
makes it better, as more viewpoints are added.[2]
[1] Imagine being the one poor guy of (select one: different
nationality, color, religion, whatevercraphumanscanthinkabout) in
the middle of a circle of 30 bad guys with knifes of (the opposite
what you just selected). Thats a *very* different point of view. :)
No, seriously - we are a very widespread project, such a group
should reflect this.
[2] Sure they will have to have a way to get out of pointless
discussions, but Im sure we can find/define a process for it.
--
bye, Joerg
<Karnaugh> <Guy> I wrote this thing but it really sucks
<Karnaugh> <Canonical> Awesome! We will release it asap
Attachment:
pgpoLbmsHNb2x.pgp
Description: PGP signature