On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 09:18:52PM +0000, Daniel Pocock wrote: > Actually, there may be other options open to the DPL in this scenario Thanks for taking the time of explaining to me how to do my job :-) > Although the team made a decision, a contract can not be signed if the > budget is not endorsed by the DPL. So the DPL could defer ratification > of the budget on any of these grounds: > > - to ask the debconf-team to convene another IRC meeting to discuss the > concerns of Marga, Ana and Steve. […] > - one concern I heard over the weekend is that some regular sponsors are > giving money for `Debian' and it is all spent on DebConf. I don't want I don't think I'm getting this right. Are you suggesting that I use the DPL money-related prerogatives as a tactic to bend the decisions of a Debian team in a way that is to my liking? If you're suggesting that, rest assured that I would never do anything of the sort in life. When asked to approve or refuse a budget, I will make a decision based solely on the budget merits, i.e. on whether I think that the money at stake would be put into good use for Debian or not. And that would be so even if I were, personally, strongly against the decision made by the relevant Debian team. In that case, I'd rather escalate the matter further myself, than using DPL prerogatives as a tactical device. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature