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

Re: Proposed changes to the Debian Machine Usage Policy (DMUP)

On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 09:55:31AM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Could you please explain, why this is a flaw?

I think that I should do that, but first let me quote the "Comments"
section of the delegation text, as it was precisely my attempt at
explaining that:

> The ability to change DMUP is meant to allow the document to evolve
> with the addition of new services, technologies, security needs and
> procedures, etc.
> The first proposed limit to what can be changed by DSA is meant to fix
> a "flaw" in the current text. Decisions over Debian membership are
> already a responsibility of DAM and, especially considering the need
> of changing the DMUP, it is better not to mix that responsibility with
> DSA (as a paranoid mind can imagine DSA changing DMUP *precisely* to
> have a specific developer expelled ...).  Note that this limit means
> that the current DMUP text is outside the rules and should hence be
> fixed ASAP.

The full context (also discussing the ability the project have to
counter the risk of DSA-going-mad :)) is at [1].

If that is not deemed to be clear enough or satisfactory, I'm happy to
clarify any additional doubt that people might have.


[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/04/msg00016.html

Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: