On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 07:49:10AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Out of curiosity, do you plan to only formally make the people working
> in these departments delegates?
I plan to extend formal delegate status to everyone currently serving in
those roles.
It is possible that one or more of those people would be unwilling to
accept formal delegate status in one or more of those positions.
In that case, I will try to find out why, report my findings to the
developers, and solicit advice.
If there is someone in that list who appears to no longer be active with
the Project, or who refuses to get back to me regarding the delegation
issue specifically, I will consult with other members of the same team
(where applicable), report my findings to developers, and solicit
advice.
> If not, do you plan to fill the roles with different people than
> today?
I do not intend to ask for anyone's resignation without offering them
formal delegate status first (and not afterwards, either, without some
buy-in from the developers).
In summary:
1) I have no plans for a purge.
2) I am not going to make any single individual a campaign issue[1].
> > > Do you believe the Tech Committee is effective in its role for the
> > > project?
> >
> > I suspect not; as I stated in my platform[2]:
> >
> > I will reactivate the Technical Committee -- which has fallen dormant
> > again -- or amend the Constitution to replace it with a body that
> > works better. That almost a year has gone by with no mail to the list
> > (apart from a test message by Wichert Akkerman), let alone a dispute
> > to resolve, makes me suspect that this body has lost the confidence of
> > the developers. I'd like to work with the members of the Committee
> > that are still interested in serving to see how this body can be
> > improved and revitalized.
>
> I wonder why reviving the CTTE has to wait until you become the project
> leader.
The Debian Project Leader is empowered by clause 5.1.6 of the Debian
Constitution[2] to seat and
remove members of the Technical Committee.
The Project Leader may:
[...]
Together with the Technical Committee, appoint new members to the
Committee. (See §6.2.)
I cannot exercise this power unless I am elected. The current DPL can,
if he chooses.
Furthermore, if it is the case that the Technical Committee is a
dysfunctional or ineffective body, the Constitution should be amended to
dissolve it. The DPL has augemented power to initiate and manage
General Resolutions (Constitution 4.2.1, 5.1.5, 5.1.7, and 5.1.8).
If the Technical Committee should be replaced -- and I do not presume
that to be the case -- then the Project Leader has the authority to
inaugurate a new body accountable to him through delegation
(Constitution 5.1.2), or by instantiating an independent group throu the
General Resolution process (see above).
I do not act on these matters at present because I perceive them as the
Project Leader's prerogative.
[1] With what should be the understood exception of the other candidates
running for DPL; we almost have to discuss each other to some extent
for purposes of contrast. Neverthess I have no intentions of
divesting Martin Michlmayr or Gergely Nagy of any responsibilities
they may currently possess as a result of my election as DPL, should
that happen -- apart from the office of DPL itself, of course.
[2] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
--
G. Branden Robinson | There's no trick to being a
Debian GNU/Linux | humorist when you have the whole
branden@debian.org | government working for you.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Will Rogers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature