Re: Let's make Debian DPLess!?
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:50:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> perhaps we can just rename the role and tune it a bit in the constitution
> so that it stops being misleading towards the outside, and perhaps make
> more clear what the role entails towards the inside. Although naming it
> for what it is, might also make the position even less appealing than
> it is now, and less worthy of inclusion in ones CV and references. :)
> If the latter, more appropriate names that come to mind are f.ex.:
>
> - Debian Project Ambassador
> - Debian Finance Minister
While I generally agree with you, there's a problem: the position is a
largely thankless, massive amount of work that's contrary to what Debian is
about (code hacking and solving technical problems[1]). Our kind of people
is strongly awerse to bureaucracy and management. Thus, a lofty glorious
title is a perk of the job, let's not make it even less unappealing.
Heck, we could go the other way, and extend the role of the DPL somewhat.
A possible idea: DPL decrees. The DPL could get the right to make any
decision available to a GR, as long as within 2*7*24 hours of the
announcement not a single person who'd be eligible to vote issues a veto.
That'd make matters like the recent oh-so-vital GR about constitution
furniture both not require an action from a good percentage of project
members, and, by being far more lightweight, allow doing more trivial,
obvious or uncontroversial fixes without the whole machinery of a GR.
Aborting a decree by just a single veto means there's no way they could
be abused.
That's just one of many ways to make the DPL more useful in non-boring
matters and make the position more glorious without adding any actual powers
(as if you can pass a decree, you could have done it via GR).
[1]. And flamewars. You can't claim Debian is not about flamewars...
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ preimage for double rot13!
Reply to: