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

Re: Questioning the TC's power to decide on technical policy

Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> If someone made arguments along those lines I would advise the
> Secretary to say that these things are matters for the DPL, and that
> if a Developer feels that the DPL has overstepped the mark they should
> use a General Resolution to do so.
> Likewise, if the TC is overzealous within its domain of authority
> (which clearly does include the contents of the policy manual) the
> proper response is a General Resolution, not for the Secretary to
> claim that the TC decision is void.

On the other hand, a GR is heavy artillery, and should not be used
unless attempts at consensus were previously made. Perhaps you should
consider the inquiries as an attempt to avoid the heavy artillery, an
attempt to resolve issues in a timely, civilised manner.

> I think all of these things are very dangerous territory for the
> Secretary.  The Secretary should avoid getting involved in the
> substance of these kind of subjective disputes about what is and is
> not sufficiently ripe, or what is or isn't detailed design, or what is
> or isn't sufficient consultation.

The technical committee should also avoid getting involved in the
practice of detailed design, or design of new policies (and whether
something can or cannot depend on some other thing *is* policy, and
therefore not the jurisdiction of the CTTE, for example; unless 6.1.4 or
6.1.2 apply, and in the disputed case, neither of them do).

I suggest you take your own advice, too.

Also, see 7.1.3, in relation with 6.3.5 and 6.3.6 - I believe the
Secretary has every right to get involved, both on his own, and on
behalf of others.

> This is particularly the case when the complaint is not in fact being
> made by the policy maintainers whose toes are allegedly being stepped
> on; rather it is being made by one side of this unfortunate and
> politically charged argument because they foresee an outcome they
> don't like.

If it is - as you say - politically charged argument, then I must
strongly urge the technical committee to use and vote with the ballot
the CTTE chairman posted[1] earlier, because that one is about a
technical decision, about the question the committee was actually asked
about in the first place, and avoids (most of) the politically charged
parts. And as you are well aware of, the technical committee is a
technical board, that decides on technical matters (6.1.1, 6.1.2). The
constitution does not give the CTTE power to rule in politically charged
matters. Those powers belong to the developers, by way of General
Resolution (4.1.5).

 [1]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00281.html

Attachment: pgprH4MARubAO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: