Re: why debian
On Sat, Nov 13, 2004 at 12:20:02PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Debian isn't a true democracy. We elect our leader, and thereafter
> > the leader acts under his own accord.
>
> It's a representative democracy, much like the US government. Except
> Debian actually works.
If the US only used Condorcet's Method for voting, like Debian does...
It would actually make 3rd party candidates viable.
> > The recent leaders have generally taken a hands-off approach so you
> > probably don't really notice they're even there. However, I believe
> > some leaders before my time (Bruce Perens, for example), were much more
> > active and took more advantage of their power.
>
> Do you see this for the better or worse, and if worse, how would you
> change it?
I think it's just Debian evolving and maturing. A few years back,
stronger leaders were needed to help establish what Debian's
fundamentals--like the Social Contract, the DFSG... Since Debian is now
so well defined, there's not much a leader needs to do to keep Debian
going.
Most of Debian's remaining problems (overly long release cycles and poor
scaling as the number of packages increases) are not something a strong
leader could easily solve, unfortunately.
--
For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!
Reply to: