Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers
On Monday, December 05, 2016 10:02:02 PM Ian Jackson wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"):
> > Because I generally find it's generally the wrong tool for the job. If
> > I can come up with a good explanation for why somebody should take a
> > particular course of action (which I need before I'm willing to override
> > anybody), and I take the time to explain it to them and discuss with
> > them, I find we usually end up agreeing.
>
> That is of course mostly true of disagreements.
>
> But it is not mostly true of problems which come to the TC.
>
> Of course sometimes the TC will find that getting people to explain
> themselves clearly will cause the dispute to evaporate. I remember
> that happening about twice during my term. But it's easy to tell
> when this happens because both parties go away happy and say they
> don't need the TC's help any more.
>
> > The goal is not to end up with a new maintainer. Deposing a maintainer
> > or overriding them is sometimes a necessary evil, but it's never my
> > first option.
>
> Surely the goal should be to make Debian as good a social and
> technical space as possible.
>
> If the maintainer is exercising poor leadership - poor enough that
> someone has risked coming to the TC with it - then that goal is best
> served by replacing them.
Nonsense. There's no risk for a non-maintainer to come to the TC. Worst case
scenario for the non-maintainer is the status quo. The maintainer, on the
other hand, has everything to lose and nothing to gain.
The one time I was peripherally involved in one of these it was long, painful,
and no one got what they wanted, but some things did change and Debian is the
better for the changes (I think they would have happened without the TC
escalation, but that's a counter factual that can't be proven).
In my admittedly limited experience, the worst possible thing the TC could
have done was make a rapid decision.
Scott K
Reply to: