Intent to Delegate: Delegation Advisory Group
[intentionally not signed because this is a comment-seeking draft]
Hi. As discussed in [1], I'm forming a delegation advisory group to
help me with upcoming delegations.
[1]:
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/tslftm5c1e7.fsf@suchdamage.org
This group will help me by being a group that I can get advice from even
when I need to share confidential information to get that advice.
One of the reasons I'm proposing to delegate this rather than treating
it informally is to make it clear that these people can be part of the
process enough to receive confidential information.
This group will help the project by being in a position to know the full
details behind a delegation and being able to raise any concerns they
have to the project.
I want this because I want a group of people I feel comfortable seeking
advice from even if I need to include private details in my request.
Some people in the project wanted additional people besides the DPL to
be able to review the internal aspects of delegations.
This is the best approach I've come up with for allowing that review
while keeping discussions of specific delegates private.
The formal mechanism behind delegations is not changing. Formally, I
wouldn't need to consult this group, although if I didn't it
would be reasonable for people to ask why. I don't need to agree with
the advice from the group, although if they have remaining concerns at
the time of delegation, that's likely to spark a lot of discussion.
Draft Delegation
================
I appoint the following individuals as a Delegation Advisory Group:
* Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org>
* Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org>
* Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@debian.org>
* Enrico Zini <enrico@debian.org>
This delegation expires at the end of Sam Hartman's DPL term or when
replaced or updated by the DPL.
Task Description
----------------
When requested, the delegation Advisory Group may provide advice to the
DPL surrounding delegations. Advice may include advice about the choice
of delegates, the task description, or the delegation process. The
group may be privy to confidential information such as the DPL's
analysis of possible choices for delegates that is not suitable for
sharing with the project as a whole.
If the group is concerned that a particular delegation may not be a
reasonable choice for the project, they are encouraged to share their
concerns with the project. The group decides how widely concerns should
be shared.
The group is delegated the power to introduce or amend a general resolution
overriding a delegation that the DPL makes without requiring other
developers to second the resolution.
Non-Normative Appendix
----------------------
Here's how I imagine this working.
I include the advisory group in discussions of the delegation. I'd run
things by them like my thoughts on delegates and the task description.
I'd also be able to talk to them about issues like how fast to go in
trying to get resolution on who should be delegates etc or in balancing
political issues.
I'd expect that in the delegation statement I would note that I'd
reviewed the delegation with the advisory group and they didn't have any
concerns they wanted to share with the project. I would not expect the
advisory group to endorse or lobby for the delegation or write a lot of
text to be shared with the project.
Reply to: