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

Re: infrastructure team rules

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 06:31:30AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > * Infrastructure teams are groups of developers who deal with project
> >   infrastructure and have access to resources in ways other than
> >   the standard practice of uploading Debian packages.
> Which teams do you currently have in mind? That applies to DSA,
> obviously, ftp-master, but also well-functionning teams such as the
> release team?
> But it could also apply to every team that has a unix group, even if
> it's used to maintain a very small part of Debian infrastructure.

Yes. They should all have a mechanism to stop them from calcifying.

> > [...]
> > * Intervention by Debian Project Leaders is not a practical solution
> >   to resolve issues with infrastructure teams.
> Before acknowledging that, it would be great to know the status of the
> discussions between the DPL and DSA members.

Frankly, no. This is a specific instance of a problem (that may require a
specific solution, too), but that is orthogonal to the general problem we
have, and that is that there are no written guidelines or rules about the
topic, so when things get broken, and fixing them requires non-trivial
action, we get stuck in a limbo.

> > * It is necessary to define a modicum of procedure for how developers
> >   can join the infrastructure teams in order to improve them while
> >   maintaining fairness towards all.
> I'm not sure that fairness towards all is even a good goal here: the old
> team members will have to work with the new team members. We are not
> electing a commitee, where it is good if people disagree because of
> diversity of opinions. I'm OK with some teams being cabal-ish if they
> work properly.

I am absolutely not OK with that! A promise of fairness of teams towards
the general developer body and vice versa is absolutely essential for each
others to even begin to have respect for each other.

I'm thinking we may not be thinking of the same definition of the word

> > Debian developers resolve the following:
> > 
> > [...]
> I'm wondering whether we really need all that bureaucracy.  Wouldn't it
> be possible to resolve something like:
>   Debian developers resolve that some teams (pick up at least one
>   amongst DSA, ftpmaster, DAM) are not functionning properly, and
>   empower the DPL to take all necessary actions to restore normal
>   behaviour.

What will that ad hoc intervention accomplish in the long run?
Does the history of teams persistently losing activity/members
teach us nothing?

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: