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

Re: Proposal: s have a GR about the init system

> On Saturday, October 26, 2013 10:45:55 Charles Plessy wrote:
> > 
> > Conflict of interest is not a judgement on a person.  It is a judgement
> > about a situation, and a recommendation on how systematically react,
> > without making exceptions.

Le Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:31:32PM -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> It's one thing to say there's a potential bias that people should be aware of 
> (as Russ did).  It's quite another to say that a tech-ctte vote in which they 
> participate is illegitimate is another.  This only comes up because we know 
> who they are employed by and what their interest is.  Many people in Debian 
> are employed to do different things related to Debian that aren't disclosed.  
> Unless there's some kind of disclosure policy for everyone involved in the any 
> technical discussion around Debian, I think it's silly to claim Steve and 
> Colin are inherently unable to separate what's good for Debian from what's 
> good for Canonical.  This is just one more symptom of irrational anti-
> Ubuntu/Canonical bias I see from some people in Debian and I encourage Steven 
> and Colin not to give in to it.

Le Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 07:55:00AM +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
> If there are people inside Debian (i.e. people who would have a vote
> in a Debian GR or who are actively involved in packaging) who have no
> confidence in the Debian Technical Committee to come to a fair decision
> for the benefit of all of Debian then I would be concerned. That random
> people not involved in Debian have prejudged individual members is of
> no concern.

Hi all,

the reason why the reaction to a conflict of interest should be automatic is
that it protects the people: their honesty is not put in question.  They do not
have to justify it or to convince others, they just automatically refrain from
voting, regardless how themselves or others are confident that they would vote
without bias.  It also protects the comittee itself, by completely nullifying
the question from the very start.

I strongly recommend that the three current and former employees of Canonical
refrain from voting: not only because of the current circumstances, but also to
make the case for the time a different conflict of interest will happen.  We
should not consider that we can have a relaxed attitude now and that we will do
the right time at that time, this is wishful thinging.  If we do not keep high
standards now, it will be hard to have high standards then, because the same
arguments will come again, that the mere idea that somebody can be biased is
insulting to that person, etc...


Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

Reply to: