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

Re: Please update the DSA delegation

Joerg Jaspert writes ("Re: Please update the DSA delegation"):
> [Lucas:]
> > 3) I was a bit surprised to see Martin's announcement that Hector
> > was now a member of DSA, and his request to update the DSA delegation.
> > The usual process is that the appointement of delegates is usually
> > discussed between the DPL and the team. Of course, for well-functioning
> > teams that propose a new delegate who already went through a training
> > process, that discussion is rather likely to be short. But that's not a
> > valid reason to suppress it completely and make it sound like a
> > public demand that the DPL does the required paperwork (I'm sure that
> > it was not Martin's intent, but it's still worth clarifying, I think).
> Really. Interesting. Honestly, for functional teams the DPL is nothing
> but putting his stamp on team changes the team wants. It shouldn't be
> anything else there. If I remember correctly the DPL learned about the
> last ftpmaster promotion around 2 weeks after it happened.[1]

The correct process doesn't depend on whether the team is "functional"
or not.  After all, the latter might be a matter of subjective
opinion, or disputed.  And as it stands Lucas is right about the
correct order of events.

But, I also agree with some of the sentiments in Joerg's mail.  If
indeed it is desirable to update the delegation text for DSA then I
think that should be separated from routine team changes.  Both
because there is a risk that it might appear otherwise to be a way of
applying pressure, and because rubber stamping a routine team change
for team which is working satisfactorily should be just a matter of
saying "yes".  DSA can go and write the announcement.

I would go further and say that I think it would be better to do
things differently.  For a team which is functioning well, it would be
helpful if the DPL delegated to the team the authority over its own
composition, explicitly reserving the right to intervene.  That way
there is no procedural problem: there is no question of someone de
facto making decisions which de jure they are not empowered to make,
or alternatively of having to have people wait for a rubber stamp from
the DPL before getting on with useful work.

But for now I think Lucas should simply say to DDA "promoting Hector
is fine, please go and tell d-d-a; we will carry on with the
delegation update of course".


Reply to: