also sprach Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.org> [2014-04-19 05:25 +0200]:
> Moray, Holger and me were appointed chairs back in 2011 (or
> rather, at some point between DC10 and DC11).
[…]
> I think that the DebConf governance method should *really* be
> re-discussed, or at the very least, a new team should be
> appointed.
Dear Gunnar,
First, I want to thank you for your open and honest message.
I didn't think it was "whiny" at all.
Second, I agree with you that DebConf governance should be
re-discussed. I did write
https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/GovernanceProposal14++ with that in
mind (and seeing what happened around DC13). However, I am not
proposing that this (wiki page) is the only way forward. I do hope
that we are going to enter discussions, possibly even meet for a day
at DC14/DC15…
You write that the problem is that the teams come to the chairs too
often, while I've also heard the complaint that the teams sidestep
the chairs and make decisions by themselves.
This suggests a fundamental fracture. Where to go from here?
Gunnar, Moray and Holger, it would be really great if you would
stand with us for what's to come. Your experience is invaluable.
I can only speak for myself, but if any of you say "this won't work"
or "I'd consider this", I'll take it to my heart, and I will not
just push it away thinking that I might know better.
However, this is not because you are chairs, it's because you three
have a massive amount of DebConf experience and have greatly
contributed to DebConf (and continue to…).
Let's not talk about what happened in the past that got you
frustrated though, if you're okay with that. I think your (Gunnar's)
account is fair and I agree with him that the crux is probably to be
found in the original delegation of the chairs. This is not a stab
at zack, at all; I think his delegation and the wording were wise at
the time. But it did not properly define the role of the chairs, and
definitely not in the context of a larger picture.
Our current governance model (which is basically limited on the
chairs delegation and otherwise works through do-ocratic measures)
is the first real version (that I know) of the attempt to make
DebConf an official aspect of Debian, and we all know what 1.0
means. That shouldn't hold us up!
If anyone in the local teams is pushing ahead and the chairs are not
involved in the way they should be, then it's because there are
voids in the governance model to be filled. What we have doesn't
suffice.
Part of the reason here is that you, the chairs, feel responsible
for [the use of Debian ressources by] two conferences at once. And
you might have a life of your own and *gasp* sleep occasionally. So
DC14 is right ahead of us and there are uncertainties. And those
overzealous DC15 people are busy apparently repeating the whole DC13
experience, wanting to set up legal structures and generally moving
faster than you might like it.
For now, my suggestion is to trust the other people involved. It is
safe to assume that we all share the same goal: making DebConf
great, each and every time again.
Meanwhile, we should try to see how we can design DebConf for the
future such that we incorporate our experience, learn from what's
currently going on and get onto the same page, altogether again.
In my governance proposal, I incorporated the chairs into the
concept of an advisory board with clearly defined powers:
https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/GovernanceProposal14++#Advisory_board
If you notice parallels to corporate structure here, then let me say
this: it's intentional. It's not the way we work in Debian in
general. However, DebConf is a special sub-project of Debian, which
deals with real people in real time and handles real money, and not
small amounts thereof. A more corporate approach seems appropriate,
I think. And it needs not mean that we adopt the aspects of
corporations that many of us don't like.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org>
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf14: Portland, OR, USA: http://debconf14.debconf.org
DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)