Re: Updating the Policy Editors delegation

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Updating the Policy Editors delegation"):
> Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> > The policy editors will continue to be the maintainers of the policy
> > package, and can change the policy team membership and the policy
> > process as they see fit.  Their substantive decisons are subject to
> > the TC's review.  If they go entirely mad the TC can replace them.
> 
> I would be unhappy about moving in this direction.  We went to some effort
> a while back to convert the Policy Editor role to a delegated role in the
> Debian project, and I continue to think that's appropriate given the
> importance of Policy to the project as a whole.  It provides another level
> of review that can focus on the process and health of the team, as opposed
> to the TC review, which the constitution focuses on the contents of the
> results.
> 
> I would prefer to have the Policy Editors continue to be a delegated
> position for that reason.

This is all very well but I think de jure they aren't a delegated
team, and the distinction is defined in the constitution.  This is not
trivially bypassable, because a delegated team is one who derives
their powers from the DPL and the constitution limits the powers of
the DPL.

Of course if the policy editors want to take advice from the DPL, then
that's fine.

Note also that there are bits of policy that aren't in the
debian-policy package.  I think those have the same status:
self-governing maintainers, whose decisions are subject to review by
the TC.

Ian.