Stefano Rivera dijo [Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:37:12AM +0200]: > In response to some concerns I've heard, I'd like to address the private > (and late) decision process here. These are my words, not the > committee's as a whole. > > I'm sorry the decision took a while. And I regret not announcing our > full decision process in advance. This is simply because we hadn't yet > decided how we wanted to make the decision. > (...) > Again, we were divided in which of these we supported, which we thought > the most important, and which we'd state less diplomatically :P > We spent a good couple of hours trying to build a consensus on a > selection. Once it was clear that that wasn't going to emerge, we went > with a vote. > > I hope that clarifies things for anyone who feels cabalized. Thanks for your words, Stefano. Much needed, and much appreciated. I will add just a line to all of what you said: We have the tradition of having the decision process in the open. But this should not be seen as _mandating_ it to be so. The DebConf Committee is the delegated body¹ first first and foremost to "make final decisions about who will organize DebConf". And while the Committee is "highly invited to take input from the wider Debian community", this very phrasing means that, in cases where it is needed (and I agree with your rationale and explanation, this was a decisions with more rough edges than usual), you are empowered _not_ to request or consider this input. ¹ https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2017/01/msg00003.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature