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

Re: Please update the DSA delegation

On 05/12/13 at 10:53 +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Hi, 
> On Wed Dec 04, 2013 at 17:45:22 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > 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.
> I don't understand that. Hector has been doing a good amount of work as
> part of the DSA team. After he has been a trainee for half a year, I
> spoke with the other members (yes, that was done privatly, i need to
> admit) if they also think that he should become a full member. I waited
> until I heared back from all other members.
> > 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).
> My intent was to be as open as possible in the decission we have taken. 
> As Joerg wrote, I think uncontroversial changes to functional teams have
> never been a problem for an update of a DPL delegation.
> Is the DSA team a non-functional team?

I wouldn't say that. I think that the general opinion inside the project
is that it's functioning quite well, well, or very well, depending on
who you ask.

However, there has recently been a number of events where there seem to
have been communication problems between DSA and the rest of project
(service developers not engaging with DSA early during the design
process; service developers engaging with DSA late, and then having
difficult conversations; failed contact between service maintainers and
DSA about service moves, ...). And as a result, several people gave
up on hosting services they maintain inside Debian infrastructure.

I think that it's important for Debian to provide an environment for
experimenting ideas on infrastructure, designing new services, etc.
Ideally, I think that this should happen on Debian infrastructure
managed by DSA, because (1) it facilitates collaborative service
maintenance; (2) it's better when people focus on what they are doing
best, and we don't have a infinite supply of expert sysadmins.
So I'm trying to see if something can be done to improve the current


Reply to: