Re: New policy draft available at http://master.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/policy/
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cistron.nl> writes:
Wichert> What Ian is basically saying (correct me if I'm wrong here)
Wichert> is that he would like to see someone in charge of policy who
Wichert> takes a more active role and will pick up those lost
Wichert> proposals himself. Someone who takes a more active role in
Wichert> the process and is willing to make a stand if needed. I
This has not been possible in the past since there was no
sanction for any such person, or indeed, even this process. Unless
the DPL is willing to stand up and empower a person or a group, there
is not constitutional power given to anyone except the tech ctte to
create new policy.
Indeed, if you are willing to delegate such authority, I would
be willing to step up.
Wichert> agree that the old process with a single policy czar did not
Wichert> work, we've proven that. However the current process seems
Wichert> to have gone too much into the opposite direction, and we
Wichert> might want to look into finding some middle ground.
Then we need to discuss exactly what we want this person to do.
Wichert> What policy needs is someone who is willing to take a more
Wichert> active role in the process and actively work on policies,
This does not need a DPL mandate; the current guidelines all
allow for people to undertake this role.
Indeed, the problem seems to be lack of volunteers, and time:
Anyone developer can take up a policy proposal, and call for
discussion, or move the process along.
Unfortunately, few people have stepped up to the plate (Julian
did a lot a while ago, but he scaled back since)
Wichert> while still using the BTS-based system to keep everyone
Wichert> involved.
The implication here is that you need someone to do most of
the work, and just keep everyone else in the loop. I think
that we should stick to the current method of policy changes which
allows for anyone to initiate discussions, and a small group of
developers to bring changes forth; what we need is someone with
authority to step in and steer discussions that are stalled; and
decide whether a consensus has been reached.
I still do not think that this person should be able to
override formal objections from more than one developer (in other
words, two or more develoerps formally objecting to the policy lead
should be able to bring the issue before the technical committee).
manoj
--
Ever Onward! Ever Onward! That's the sprit that has brought us
fame. We're big but bigger we will be, We can't fail for all can see,
that to serve humanity Has been our aim. Our products now are known
in every zone. Our reputation sparkles like a gem. We've fought our
way thru And new fields we're sure to conquer, too For the Ever
Onward IBM! Ever Onward, from the 1940 IBM Songbook
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: