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

Re: Please update the DSA delegation

Gerfried Fuchs writes ("Re: Please update the DSA delegation"):
> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2013-12-05 03:32:19 CET]:
> > In most cases, well-functioning teams will make non-controversial
> > nominations, and the DPL will accept them without question.  But that's
> > *not* the same thing as the delegation being a "rubber stamp".
>  Maybe I get you wrong - and maybe you got Lucas wrong - but are you
> implying that Hector is a controversial nomination?  Where did I miss
> that part?  From what I read in Lucas initial response to Martin, it was
> about general communication issues with the (current) DSA team (wheter
> or not that might be true), not with Hector specificly.  The way you
> phrase it makes it rather sound that Hector is a controversial
> nomination?

Perhaps we are just having a misunderstanding of the phrase "rubber

What I meant to say is that (even if the DPL hasn't explicitly asked
the team to manage its own membership) when things are working
reasonably well I would expect the DPL to routinely and quickly
approve uncontroversial appointments (if I may borrow your word).

I'm not saying that the DPL doesn't have a discretion.  To me the
phrase "rubber stamp" means an approval which in principle could be
withheld but which we all predict will be granted (and, probably,
granted without a deep investigation of the issues).

It seems to me that Hector's appointment to DSA ought to fall in this
category, unless there's something going on that I'm missing.


Reply to: