Re: Description of tasks (was: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64)
martin f krafft wrote:
<snip>
> My point is that I think there should be documents describing the
> role positions and their exact extents. Moreover, the keepers of
> role positions should be persuaded to extend these job descriptions
> with all kinds of resources they have accumulated during their
> terms. Such a document must be able to convey the extent of the job
> and allow someone with enthusiasm and time to get up to speed in
> short time.
> Only with such document will Debian have a true democracy.
....or, indeed, a true meritocracy. See below.
> Up till
> then, it's closer to a meritocracy (I had to look that up)
Except it isn't. In a meritocracy, a new person who's more competent (for
whatever reason -- perhaps because the old person was tired or busy) would
take over quickly. This does *not* happen.
It's more like a quangocracy (rule of quasi-autonomous non-governmental
organizations) or a squattocracy (rule by squatters). The people who are
in certain positions are there because they are there, more than for any
other reason.
> because
> those with roles have built up inertia and can only be replaced with
> great difficulties.
Precisely.
> And in case of an accident, the position may be
> very difficult to take over, potentially causing serious harm.
Furthermore, with a more specified role description, it becomes possible to
objectively evaluate alternative volunteers for the roles -- or indeed, to
break up the roles into smaller subroles. Right now both actions appear to
be impossible.
> I'd appreciate comments, but hope that you, Martin, agrees, and that
> you can get your officers to give it a whirl.
Good luck.
--
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Reply to: