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

Re: Let's make Debian DPLess!?

On Sat, 2017-03-11 at 09:59:20 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:50:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > The truth is that even though the constitution grants _some_ powers to
> > the DPL, they are in general not used, because IMO the project would
> > not see those actions with good eyes.
> I'm not sure I agree with that. DPL powers include delegation and
> deciding how to spend project money. I'd say it's pretty
> uncontroversial that we want those things to happen. What powers
> specifically do you see that the project would prefer the DPL not use?

From the current list of powers in the consitution §5.1.1—§5.1.5 are
IMO the strongest powers, and they are either very very seldomly used
or when used they are pretty much a rubber stamp. Whenever a DPL has
tried to be more proactive the project has been mired in controversy.

The two examples you cite are proof, IMO, that the DPL is not needed.
Delegations are pretty much "delegated" to the delegates themselves
who tend to self-organize, or just to officialize pre-existing
non-delegated teams. Expenses, which is probably among one of two tasks
the DPL spends more time in is pretty much for minutia, as §5.1.10
states big ones need to be debated on the mailing lists.

Every and each year we have these pharaonic platforms where the
candidates present all those grandiose pyramid plans. Those never happen.
But I guess it's more interesting than writting a platform that states:

  * Will rubber-stamp delegations.
  * Will be an ambassador for the project.
  * Will be a minister of finances for minutia.



Reply to: