Re: Call for a new DPL mediation ... This will be the only thread i will reply to in the next time about this issue.
* Martin Schulze (firstname.lastname@example.org) [060621 07:56]:
> Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> > AIUI (please, correct me if I am wrong) the D-I repository is hosted on
> > svn.d.o, a machine belonging to the debian project. I don't see why the
> > DPL would have authority over the mailing lists (hosted on a debian
> > machine and maintained by the list admins) but not the svn repo (hosted
> > on a debian machine, maintained by the svn admins (alioth team?) and
> > access for that particular repo controlled by the project admins).
> Maybe because the team is using the resource on their own and needs to
> organise itself. If some external third party (e.g. the DPL) screws
> up and orders something, they are probably damaging the team. As a
> result this could end up in the team giving up or moving their work to
> a resource they have full control over so that such an incident does
> not happen again. Both would not be the results you had intended, I
There are two different things:
- Is it helpful?
- Is it allowed?
I don't see why a GR cannot overrule the decisions of any team, or the
tech ctte (as long as it's a technical issue), and also the DPL could
redelegate the ongoing task to someone else. This is of course only the
"can it be done"-part of it.
Of course, in most cases, speaking with people is enough to resolve
issues. But our constitution gives rules how teams can be changed (i.e.
delegation for ongoing tasks), and how decisions can be overwritten
(though of course I'm happy that these rules are not used too often).