[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf Governance (was: DebConf governance & 'Debian Deutschland' name and TO status)



Le samedi, 26 avril 2014, 21.14:21 Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> I'm open to changing the model, but:
> - I would like to keep it quite simple (the current proposal is 32
>   lines)

While the delegation is 32 lines, the framework in which teams are 
supposed to swim into is not:

	https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DecisionMaking

As a short contribution to the discussion, let me emphasize what Raphaël 
already wrote before in this thread with my own words:

The current loosely-defined decision-making procedure within the DebConf 
Team is extremely frustrating for all involved parts, leads to 
unnecessary delays at the worst moments and dilutes the feeling of 
responsibility for all parties: chairs can feel distrusted when sub-
teams decide important things on their own; members can feel distrusted 
when they are forbidden to take decisions in a timely manner.

The current result of this (IMHO broken) decision-making process is a 
lot of frustration for all parties, (temporary) fading out of essential 
members of the decision-making process (thereby making the decision-
making process even harder), etc.

Finally, to speak on a personal level, I feel compelled to write that 
despite a feeling of responsibility to stay involved in the DebConf 
Team, it just doesn't work for me:
  * on one hand, local teams are running full-steam ahead for the good
    of "their" conference: I feel it's right that they do so and don't
    want to step on their toes. I also trust them to come get me if I'm
    needed (which I shouldn't…)
  * on the other hand, the absence of any significant change in the
    team's decision-making processes sucks all my leftover motivation.
    To be fair, I feel there is a push towards a change (notably,
    madduck's GovernanceProposal), but given the legacy decision-making
    process, this push appears to be stuck on the chair's desk who are
    either disagreeing or not interested in said change.

The end-result of that is that DebConf falls down my priority list. 
Whether that's good or bad for the successes of DC1{4,5} is up to the 
reader's.

Cheers,
OdyX

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: