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

Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:20:56PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 13:50 -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Correct. The appropriate GR is "Foo shall be removed for failure to perform
> > the duties of $position", with the rationale citing "failure to perform
> > action A, a duty of $position".
> > 
> I believe anyone proposing, and possibly seconding such a resolution
> should have the self-respect to resign themselves if it fails.

I fail to see why that would be a matter of self-respect, or even
appropriate, unless one makes the implicit assumption (which I do not) that
*all* such GRs would be ill-advised and motivated by self-interest.

Which is not to say it couldn't be; just that I don't consider it an
absolute truth.

You'll notice, also, that I said that's what the appropriate GR would be,
if you wanted to "force" someone to do something in Debian; a censure for
failure to do the appointed tasks of their position. I did not, have not,
and have no current plans to, propose such a GR. I'm not certain I would
vote for one; it would depend greatly on the rationale and the discussion

I also don't advocate it as a first step. But if even the DPL whose
platform has positions about improved communication cannot effectively
manage to convince people that this is a duty of their position they should
be fufilling, *and* if sufficient developers consider it to actually *be*
a duty of that position, *and* if the DPL fails to disappoint the delegate
in question, *then* it *may* be true that the last resort of the project
as a whole is to pass a GR forcibly overridding the DPL's decision of

I think it would be one more stain on the project, personally, and I truly
hope it never has to be done. On the flip side, I remain quite convinced
that the current situation is *not* a tenable one, in the long term, and
that the end result will be either a project fork, the slow attrition of
people tired of having the fight, or, most prefferably, a solution to the
problem of the utter lack of communication going on.

This is, mind you, not the sole province of the ftpmasters; as a group,
they are simply one of the most obvious occurances. Very few people I know
of in the project make (and keep) commitments about regular and useful
status communications, whether it be in bugs or on d-d-a. There are a few,
yes, but they stand out in my memory because they are the exception, not
the rule.
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>                                        ,''`.
Debian GNU/kNetBSD(i386) porter                                      : :' :
                                                                     `. `'
http://nienna.lightbearer.com/                                         `-

Attachment: pgpoiK0b_UTPV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: