On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:04:06PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: > I would call on the DPL to finally appoint an independent audit of the > circumstances and report for once and for all whether the allegations > are true, false or simply misunderstood. I thought my position on this matter was already clear from https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/12/msg00068.html (in particular the final part of it). To answer specifically your direct request: I will not appoint any independent audit of this matter, because I don't consider we need one. In fact, I also think it will be counterproductive. If there were anything to be gained in running the process you suggest --- and I'm entirely unconvinced there is any --- the potential damages to our community would be far superior to what we could possibly gain. If you are convinced something went wrong this time, please stop looking for someone to blame, and start thinking at how to improve processes so that next time things would work better. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature