Re: infrastructure team rules
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 01:34:15PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Once we have resolved something as he propose the DPL will be empowered
> to solve the problem with any team in the present and in the future.
Sorry, but that won't work. The Constitution already empowers the DPL to do
things that nobody else is explicitly in charge of, yet none of them ever
did anything substantial to e.g. bop DSA to be more active. If we explicate
that ability of theirs, that won't necessarily make them more efficient,
or at least I don't see any proof for that.
> A big part of our current problem is that some team do not feel they are
> under the authority of the DPL whereas IMO the should be.
>
> Indeed reading the first part of your proposal (btw, thanks for that!) I
> was expecting a second part precisely on the lines of Lucas' POV. What I
> had in mind is something like: the developer body resolves that whatever
> team is under the authority of the DPL.
This argument is a red herring, but an apparently successful one.
Well, at least my proposal resolves as the first matter of business
that the DPL decides whether a team is governed by these rules, and
the set of rules is then resolved by the developers.
I think having agreed-upon rules is the best way to proceed. I don't want
to give the DPL or the existing team members a blank cheque authority over
infrastructure teams. They are nobody's personal playground, they are a
common good and they need to be governed as such.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: