Re: Description of tasks (was: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64)
martin f krafft dijo [Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:29:06AM +0200]:
> (...)
> 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. Up till
> then, it's closer to a meritocracy (I had to look that up) because
> those with roles have built up inertia and can only be replaced with
> great difficulties. And in case of an accident, the position may be
> very difficult to take over, potentially causing serious harm.
I am among those who think that a democracy is among the worst things
that have tried to happen (BTW, I refuse to believe there is a single
example of a proper, large-scale democracy) to humankind. There are
many things I do not have the authority that knowledge would give me
that is needed to decide upon - As a simple example, in my country
(Mexico) there is a perception that we have a new and shiny democracy
(reasons for that beyond the scope of this mail :) ). The federal
government and the capital city's local government are opposed to each
other, and the city's government is making its best to show off as
'more democratic' (whatever that means) than the federal. There is a
very important vial work that started recently. The city's government
showed its values by making a referendum over wheather we need this
work or not... Why? I have no idea. I suppose the Mayor's office
should have checked this over with the real experts, vial planners and
such. By asking us all, it will probably use a broken criteria to
decide.
In Debian, we have some elements of a democracy - We vote for our
leader and for som important decissions. However, even if it is not
written anywhere, we all know there is a group much more skilled than
us for ${some_task}. And for ${another_task}, we might be in this
elite ourselves - our voice should have more weight than other
people's. Of course, we are quite a close-knit community for a project
this big - I expect in this case the RMs to listen to my ideas and
arguments and ponder them accordingly. But there is a reason _they_
are RMs and not me. As stated by Joey[1], I am also saddened that we
have to GR our way to the kitchen every day. Many people (me included)
are convinced that AMD64 is very important for Sarge. There have been
many suggestions on how or what to make (i.e., having official AMD64
only for 3.1r1). Hundreds of mails have been exchanged in the last
week on this topic - I had to skip most of them, but they all seem to
be in the exact same spot, out of the random sample I read.
A meritocracy _is_ good. In fact, there are many levels of
meritocracies in Debian - Each one of us is in one of the most
important ones, just by being able to read/write (and, of course,
understand) to this list. It requires a certain technical level not
held even by most of our users, and by far. We have a more closed
meritocracy: The list of DDs, who have proved themselves worthy and
have manifested ideologicaly sympathy with our common goals. Inside
this meritocracy, we have many subsets. And that is good. That enables
us to do a high quality work in many different subjects, by having
specialists in each area.
Please, stop pushing the absolute democracy. We are not all equals. We
have never been, we will never be - unless we become quite a boring
and useless project.
Greetings,
[1] http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/voting-2004-07-13-20-12
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.cx - (+52-55)1451-2244 / 5554-9450
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
Reply to: