Re: Small teams and other platform positions...
I believe Ean is not arguing about what is the most effective way. He
runs his own s/w development company and he knows the value of face to
face meetings.
The point is, we as Debian team, should not depend on physical meetings
as a way to conduct business. If we do, then we are essentially saying
that only those developers who are rich enough (in terms of money,
time , ability ) to travel are only ones who are worthy of contributing.
It has got nothing to do with the amount of work they are putting into
Debian.
Further, we already have small teams that are responsible for particular
tasks - ftpmasters, release team, X Strike force, gcc etc. The primary
difference I see is that a few people are advocating physical meetings
as "the" way to optimize their jobs and IMHO, that is a very wrong
precedent.
Regards,
Vaidhy
PS: Hi Ean, I am back from dead for you :)
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 10:42 +0200, David Schmitt wrote:
> On Sunday 27 March 2005 22:10, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> > Yes there should be accessible documentation for what all the teams are
> > upto and electronic systems could automate a lot of that. But eventually
> > someone has to monitor the electronic systems and then we are right back
> > to square one. Only those with an inordinate amount of time will be able
> > monitor everything. Those without time will have to choose the particular
> > bits they are informed about and will be at sea and unhelpful on the bits
> > they don't know about.
>
> Just to add a data point: I was able to explain most of the Vancouver
> controversy to a DD who doesn't follow -devel in 15 minutes telephone time.
> After my experience with summarizing the -vote discussion I don't think I
> could do something similar (electronic document) with the Vancouver thread
> without several days of work.
>
>
> Regards, David
--
Vaidhyanathan Mayilrangam Gopalan <vaidhy@loonys.net>
Reply to: