Re: Why is there only self-nomination? [Re: Expulsion process: Sven Luther]
- To: Luk Claes <email@example.com>
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Why is there only self-nomination? [Re: Expulsion process: Sven Luther]
- From: Frank Küster <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 10:05:09 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <45E747FF.email@example.com> (Luk Claes's message of "Thu\, 01 Mar 2007 22\:39\:11 +0100")
- References: <200703011324.l21DORYa004917@cft.snafu.priv.at> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20070301134517.GH2104@excelhustler.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20070301145455.GB13970@azure.humbug.org.au> <20070301161448.GA23590@scowler.net> <45E747FF.email@example.com>
(moving away from private)
Luk Claes <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Personally, I think the idea of a DD having to ack his nomination, though only
> after being nominated by some (Q?) fellow DDs would be better than a plain
> self-nomination. What do others think?
I fear it wouldn't work in practise. I have no idea whether the people
I value, and would like to see in the position of DPL, have any
inclination and, in particular, the needed free time to do so. It
doesn't make much sense that everybody starts sending e-mails around "Hi
$foo, I think you are $bar, would you mind me nominating you for DPL?".
There are two approaches to solve this practical problem. One is that
effectively we continue with self-nomination, just that the candidate
needs to collect seconds before he goes public. The other would be that
we would form "policital" parties who decide internally whom they
I do not want political parties in Debian.
> PS: Feel free to copy my part to a public list...
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)