Re: [Debconf-team] Why a new DebConf delegation won't help
On 11.11.2015 20:47, martin f krafft wrote:
> Since then, we've seen a spectrum of problems, from the team unable
> to make decision constantly deferring to the chairs and burning them
> out, to there being a divide between chairs and some of the team,
> bringing focus to the powers attributed by the more explicit
> delegation put forth by Lucas.
Citation please.
AFAIK most of problems were with you: lack of listening (chairs had
ideas more similar to your, but you had prejudices, because you don't
like thinking that you are not completely in charge) and disorganization
(most of the requests to chairs were asked in hurry).
I find worrying that you (and your proposal) ask trust from Debian, but
without trusting Debian. So it is giving carte blanche, which on long
term it could cause problems, also because the choice of conference are
on technical side (venue size, accessibility, connection) and not about
type of conference.
OTOH I think you blamed the global team for blocking local team.
> A respectful ambience in the team will mean that plenty people will
> stick around to offer advice and oversight, without throwing new
> people into bureaucratic swamps or getting too hung up in procedures
> otherwise.
Completely agree with respectful ambiance (but I still blame you, you
insulted people, you stepped other other foot continuously, and seldom
you respected team decision [which were not *equal* to your opinion]).
For the second part. Are you sure any DebConf had bureaucracy? I think
we were always doacracy. People did the work regardless of teams. All
teams worked with much independence.
Or do you have a concrete example?
> In closing, I think creating a new delegation or reinstating an
> older one isn't going to make the problems go away that caused us to
> get to where we currently stand. Instead of a top-down perspective
> on DebConf orga, we should embrace a lean organisation, and trust
> and enable people to help Debian through their work.
I think this was agree by all people: stop about meta discussions
(organizational procedures), which nobody will follow (we are Debian!),
and let's do the work.
Work, methodology/structure and leadership ("true delegation") come from
bottom, in a natural way.
>From Debian we already have supervision from:
auditors, trademarks, publicity, outreach, admin, ... and especially
DPL, so we can work anarchically but with enough supervision from Debian
not to embarrass Debian.
For me the most important meta discussion is about the concept (and
vision) of DebConf. It seems that you have a different view, but you
have not yet wrote about your Vision of DebConf. Could you tell us more?
My vision is:
DebConf is Debian, it is a "steering conference", so Debian contributors
can meet to set goals, solve problems,.. in general to make Debian going
forward. So no need of huge public relation: our contributors will ask
other contributors to come (really no need to attract attendees with
earlier schedule and "important" talks).
Probably we need a Conference for professional (as we noticed in
DebConf15), but it should be a separate entity from the conference.
I would like to have more DebConf in developing countries (but we need
fancies hotels near airports for the professional conference).
ciao
cate
Reply to: