Re: [CTTE #746578] libpam-systemd to switch alternate dependency ordering
Le Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:58:41AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
>
> Specifically, I would like to ask Debian Developers to contribute
> (positively) to TC discussions when relevant, in order to help the TC
> get a complete understanding of the issues, their consequences, and
> possible resolutions paths. I was disappointed to see that only a
> handful of DDs (outside of TC members) took part in the recent technical
> discussions. Every DD should really feel welcomed to act like a
> (non-voting) TC member.
>
> I would also like to ask the TC to provide a bit more time for public
> discussions (during the technical discussions, and on draft CfV), as
> many project members felt that some recent votes were a bit rushed, and
> did not allow enough time for public review.
Hi Lucas and TC,
in the case of issue #741573 ("On menu systems") that I raised in April, I
would like to point out that the CTTE's behaviour makes me feel that my input
was unwelcome.
Here is what I asked:
"I am asking you to overrule Bill [who single-handedly reverted a change that
had been discussed, negociated, seconded and accepted] and let me or the Policy
Editors upload an updated version of the Policy containing our changes."
Unfortunately, the TC turned my request into a new project of writing a policy
on menu systems by themselves
(http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/debian-ctte.git/tree/741573_menu_systems),
and as the result of their lack of time, have not delivered something for the
last six months.
I asked the TC in June to refocus on the core issue (not tolerating Bill's
commit revesal), but there was no answer to my message, and work on writing a
new menu policy continued (sluggishly) without asking input to the main people
that would be affected by the decision, which I find quite illustrative of the
TC's tendency of trying to steer Debian's development.
So please, Technical Comittee, I would like to recommend you to be more
realistic and to better stick to the question that is asked to you, especially
when it is obvious that you do not have enough time to achieve something more
ambitious. Not to mention that this kind of self-appointment is unwelcome
anyway since is dis-empowers the people who are doing the work.
PS: I am writing "the TC" because its decisions are collective and I do not
want to make things too personal, but in the case this issue (#741573), I think
that Ian is quite largely responsible for the drift.
Cheers,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: