Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 03:30, John Goerzen a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:26:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > The debate has been launched on -private, but it's clear to > > everyone that we were very far from a consensus[2]. So, instead of > > *beeing consistent* with the *consensus* of the opinions, a so > > called "external" structure has been launched. Onboard, we see many > > very well known > > You know, this is far from the first time a situation like this has > happened. > > Some others, none of which caused proposals like this to occur, > included: > > * Ubuntu is funding Debian developers due to a disagreement about > direction, emphasis, and release practices. A very real fork, > yet with many common developers with Debian. > > * Progeny funded Debian developers working on alternative Debian > installers, configuration tools, and a host of other items and was > led at the time by none other than the founder of Debian (Ian > Murdock). Many of Progeny's employees were and are Debian > developers, with a former DPL (Branden) among them. > > * Bruce, a former DPL, being involved with a venture capital firm > that funded Debian developers. > > * Debian itself donated $1000 to the Gnome project to fund its > development due to a dispute with KDE over Qt licensing. > I don't recall this coming with strings such as "can't be spent on > programmer time". So there is even precedent for the project > doing this sort of thing. just let me rephrase it then. 1. The DPL is the one that appoints the RM as per constitution 2. The DPL is deeply in a structure that has supposedly nothing to do with Debian, hence does its own choices, without needing any sort of Debian approval. 3. That structure wants to pay the RM's. that's a big conflict of interest. It's IMHO a major fault coming from a delegate (and especially the DPL) to take a role in such an organisation. It's just not compatible. If aj's stops beeing a member of dunc-tank, and do not works publicily for that dunc-tank, then I remove my second here, he can stay as DPL. If he prefers dunc-tank, and work for it, he must not be a delegate anymore, and especialy not DPL. For me, it's not a vote for or against dunc-tank. I'm against it under its current form, but there is nothing I can do about it. It's a vote about a conflict of interest between the position of beeing the DPL, and taking part into dunc. It's not a recall vote against Mr Towns, it's a recall procedure to ask him to make a choice between two uncompatible tasks. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpamWS8OAohL.pgp
Description: PGP signature