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

Re: Bug#741573: #741573: Menu Policy and Consensus



Hi Sam,

[side note: while I joined the original discussion, I don't really have
a stake in the outcome, other than the desire to have a working menu]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:06:08AM +0000, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Should Bill have recused?
> Your current process does not describe when policy editors should
> recuse.
> One thing we may learn here is that we need to be more clear about how
> we handle recusals.

I'm not sure if the lack of a policy on recusals is a good excuse for
the failure to do so. If Bill opposed the proposal (which certainly is
his right), he *should* have actively partaken in the discussion,
pointing out *why* he thought it a bad idea and asking for
clarifications, improvements, etc. Instead, he mostly ignored the
discussion while it was happening (not counting the occasional mails
pointing out what he believed to be inaccuracies), and only making fully
clear that he was going to oppose the proposal when he reverted the
commit that implemented what others thought to be consensus.

I don't think this is appropriate for anyone, regardless of whether
they're policy editors. If you have an objection to a technical change
in Debian, historically we've always required that people come up with
technical reasons for either supporting or objecting to, the change.
Bill did not do that, at least not to the level I would expect from
someone who opposes a proposed change that seems to be building
consensus.

Anyway.

While I applaud your attempts to get the original people around the
table again, I'm not sure that's either productive or the role of the
TC. Not productive, because I feel that the different parties have
pretty much reached set positions that they're extremely unlikely to
deviate from anymore; and not the role of the TC, because it is the
technical committee's role to take *technical* decisions, which this
approach would not necessarily lead to.

Instead, I would prefer if the technical committee would, after
reviewing the arguments pro and con, take a decision on *which menu
system* to move forward with, rather than trying to fix the original
discussion, for which I have little hope that it will be successful.

I do believe Charles' original mail was a request for the TC to do so.
If it isn't in your interpretation, please consider this an official
request in that manner.

Thanks,

-- 
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer

  -- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: