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

The Ineffectual DPL?

I have not voted in this DPL election.  I didn't vote in last year's.  I think
I only voted in the first one, but even then, I'm not sure.

So, why have I not voted?

 1) Lack of time?

    The actual act of voting takes no time.

 2) Lack of knowing the candidates?

    Possible.  See below.

 3) Interest?


 4) Knowing that the DPL will not actually help the project, and just cause
    more work?

    Most definately.

Ok, so 4) is going to stir the hornet's nest.  Let me explain.

In the past several years, I have seen a few different DPLs in (in)action.  I
have not seen the betterment of the Debian Project as a whole(as a result of
actions the DPLs have done), yet each DPL has said how well they have improved
the situation.  Additionally, each candidate has vowed to improving Debian,
yet, in all reality, they will not be able to implement what they desire.

As we all know very well, this project is a volunteer organization.  There is
no way to enforce upon those involved any kind of responsibility.  The only
responsibility that may exist, is that which each person has placed upon

There are countless incidents in Debian's past, where some existing developer
has left in outrage, because of either some disagreement, or having something
demanded of them(this list is not exhaustive).  At any point, a developer can
decide not to continue work, and there is not a thing the project can do, to
make him(her) continue.

Which brings me to the DPL's involvment in this particular train of thought.
If the developer that is being asked to do something, or asked to discuss
something, is themself not motivated to do(discuss), then there is nothing
that the DPL can actually do to change that.  Motivation is generally a
personal thing.

Also, the DPL can appoint delegates, or add memebrs to the Tech. Ctte.  The
DPL can also make descisions when no one else does, and decide what to do with
funds held for Debian.  In all honesty, having the DPL do these things is not
in Debian's best interest.  The DPL can change per year, and there are no
technical requirements for the post.  I would much rather prefer someone to
make these appointments/decsisions who actually knows what they are doing, and
have experience doing so.

The only way one can get experience, is by actually doing similiar/related
work, which shows they know what it is they say they do.  Saying you want to
do something, or saying you know something, is not the proper venue for
building yourself up.  The only venue is action.

As those who actually do the work, get better and better at it, they become
more and more qualified to make descisions based on the work that they are
doing.  Others, who only observe from the outside, are not qualified to decide
how the work *actually being done* should proceed.  The DPL, by definition(by
being voted into office, instead of earning it), is one of those that should
not be making such decsisions.

In effect, the DPL is nothing more than a figurehead, that can change from
year to year.  This changing offers no apparent external view of stability,
which hurts Debian in the long run.  The figurehead itself may succeed in
convincing more users to make use of Debian, but any regular developer can do
that themself.  The DPL is doing nothing special there.  The DPL may be
invited to attend some conference, or do some talk.  It'd be much better, to
have someone attend who can actually benefit, or actually can talk about the
particular segment being discussed.  I consider these more perks of the
office, which make me believe the office itself is a reward, and not a duty.

So, in summary(I'm rambled on long enough), I see no point in having a DPL.
None whatsoever.  And I consider all those, past, present, and future, who are
associated with the DPL office, suspect for their motivations in seeking it.
I consider them only willing to improve their own situation, instead of
improving the actual Debian Project itself.

ps: Don't send me replies directly.  Chances are I won't read them.  Don't
    expect to see me replying much in this thread.  There's no point in
    me wasting my time.  I'd much rather be doing real work, then useless

    If you agree with this as I do, then a simple "I agree" will suffice, sent
    in public reply.  Then, start doing real work.

    If you don't agree, then by all means, waste your's and everyone else's
    time, by actually attempting to discuss and disect this email.  But those
    who really care about the project will ignore the ensuing discussion.

Reply to: