On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 05:58:40PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > 1. Rank the following possible functions of Debian Project Leader in [snip - ranking system] > > [ 2 ] attending trade shows and conferences > [ 1 ] resolving disputes internal to the Project > [ 2 ] representing Debian to trade associations, businesses and NGOs > (non-governmental organizations) > [ 2 ] drafting and implementing internal procedures for the Project > that aren't already well-defined > [ 1 ] appointing delegates per the Constitution > [ ] fixing bugs in packages that no one else will fix > [ 3 ] cash fundraising > [ 3 ] acquiring donations of bandwidth, equipment, and hosting > [ 4 ] mentoring other developers > > Comments: Letting the CTTE/others resolve disputes where applicable, procedure definitions shouldn't be made by the DPL alone, but perhaps by a delegated committee (or such) > > 2. Rank the following past and present DPLs in order of greatest > Comments (why did you rank these people as you did?): No experience with any DPLs except bdale... > 3. True or false: the New Maintainer system is still broken. True > 4. True or false: we should place more emphasis on architectures that > have a lot of users. False > Comments: Architectures with a lot of users (i386) already get a lot of attention. > 5. True or false: release management in this Project is a big problem. True > 6. True or false: there are too many inactive developers. True > 7. True, false, or not applicable: the Debian Project Leader should see > to it that inactive developers are placed on notice that they will > be dropped from the Project, and then if they do not become active, > "expire" them from our ranks. True > 8. True or false: the concept of "one maintainer per package" is > outmoded, and packages should be maintained as more of a group or > communal process. True > Comments: .. partly, not all packages need this. > 9. True or false: the Debian Policy Manual and Bug Tracking System > should be used together as a "stick" with which to compel > uncooperative maintainers to change the way they maintain their > packages. False ... > Comments: ... but Debian needs to remain a whole, and maintain a 'uniformity'(sp) > 10. True or false: the Debian Project is biased against people who do > not speak English fluently. True > Comments: Not much compared to others, normal in the computer world. > 11. True, false, or not applicable: there is not a lot that we can do > about the Debian Project being biased against people who do not > speak English fluently. True > 12. Should the DPL attempt to build consensus among a small group of > experts or among the whole project before taking a major action, or > should he go it alone? Mark one. > > [ ] build consensus among a small group > [ X ] build consensus among the whole Project > [ ] take unilateral action Or, where applicable, the people affected. > 13. Rank the following possible traits of Debian Project Leader as > assets (with an "A") or liabilities (with an "L") between the > brackets to the left of the item. Leave blank items you consider as > having no bearing on the role of DPL. > > [ A ] a high level of visibility as a "regular developer" on > internal Project mailing lists > [ A ] a high level of visibility as Project leader on internal > Project mailing lists > [ ] a high level of visibility in Debian-related IRC channels > [ ] a preference for reading prepared statements over extemporaneous > presentations at public gatherings > [ L ] a preference for brokering agreement behind the scenes between > conflicting parties > [ A ] a preference for brokering agreement in public between > conflicting parties > [ A ] a sense of humor > 14. True or false: the Debian Project Leader should attend as many trade > shows and conferences as possible for him or her. False... > Comments: ... unless he wants to. He should feel free to, of course. > 15. True, false, or not applicable: Debian Project funds should be > spent on getting the Debian Project Leader to as many trade shows > and conferences as possible when corporate sponsorship is > unavailable. False > 16. True or false: the Technical Committee is operating as intended > under the Constitution. False > 17. True or false: a simple majority of voting Debian Developers should > be sufficient to modify the Debian Free Software Guidelines. False > Comments: Being the basis for the Debian project, I'd expect at least a qualified majority (I do not recall the size, but 3/4ths seems reasonable to me) > 18. True or false: a simple majority of voting Debian Developers should > be sufficient to modify the Debian Social Contract. False > Comments: See above. > 19. Should decisions about DFSG-compliance be made on the debian-legal > list, or should we have a more formalized body for making such > decisions? debian-legal > Comments: People with skill and interest can subscribe. > 20. True or false: under the current Constitution as written, a simple > majority of voting Debian Developers is sufficient to modify the > Debian Social Contract and Free Software Guidelines. No idea. False, I'd guess. > 21. Mark the statements below that accurately (if not precisely) reflect > your opinions with an "X" between the brackets. Note that these > statements are wide-ranging in nature. If you have insufficient > context upon which to ground an affirmative answer, leave it blank. > Where I consider it important to determine what the respondents to > this questionnaire *don't* believe or agree with, I have supplied a > contrapositive statement. Feel free to elaborate on your answers in > the comments section. > > [ ] The DPL should not waste his time on arguments about the > Constitution, Social Contract, or DFSG. > [ ] The DPL is always perceived as the DPL, even when he or she is > not sending mails from "leader@debian.org" or providing > evidence of his or her leader status elsewhere in mail > messages he or she sends. > [ X ] The person elected to the office of DPL has a special > responsibility to keep his or her mouth shut on potentially > inflammatory issues, except when acting explicitly as DPL. > [ ] The Debian Project will only get as good a DPL as it deserves. > [ X ] Everything in Debian main should be treated as software under > the DFSG, even if it isn't software by some definitions. > [ X ] We let too much stuff that violates the spirit of the DFSG > into main. > [ ] The debian-legal list is infested with a bunch of nitpicky > nitwits who give the Project a bad name and keep Debian from > being as good as it could be by rejecting software from main > for no good reason. > [ X ] A good Debian Developer doesn't necessarily make for a good > Project Leader. > [ ] Debian should toss the DFSG and adopt the Open Source > Definition (OSD) instead. > [ ] Debian should delegate license interpretation to the Open > Source Initiative (OSI) [maintainers of the OSD]. > [ X ] Debian should stop distributing the non-free section. > [ ] Debian should keep the non-free section even if it dwindles to > the point where there is nothing interesting in it, in the > event that important new non-free software appears that our > users might want. > [ X ] Our twin priorities of "our users" and "Free Software" are > sometimes in conflict with each other. > [ ] The primary purpose of the Debian Project should be to supply > a high-quality operating system to as many people as possible. > [ X ] The primary purpose of the Debian Project should be to supply > a high-quality, Free operating system to whoever is interested > in it. > [ ] The Debian Project is an insufficiently welcoming environment > to female geeks and computer professionals. > [ X ] The DPL should step in to mediate disagreements between Debian > Developers and upstream developers, as recently happened with > MPlayer. > [ X ] The Debian Project should work with SPI or some other > organization to try and see that its needs and goals are > respected, or at least not meddled with, by governments. > [ X ] Debian Developers are substantially better at critical > thinking and logical reasoning than the general populace. > [ X ] The migration of murphy from qmail to postfix was a good > thing. > [ X ] The migration of murphy from qmail to postfix was important. > [ ] Being elected Debian Project Leader is primarily a reward for > good work. > [ X ] The Debian Machine Usage Policy (DMUP) needs to be revised. > [ ] Revising the DMUP is important. > [ X ] Voters in the Debian Project have a responsibility to make > themselves well-informed about the issues before casting a > ballot. > [ X ] There should be no one in the Project with > extra-constitutional power; that is, Debian keyring > maintenance, archive administration, system administration, > and so forth should all be formally delegated positions by the > DPL. > [ X ] Making the Debian keyring maintainer, archive administrators, > and system administrators DPL delegates has creates a > potentially dangerous situation for which there is no analogue > under the current situation. > [ ] The DPL has more important things to worry about than who's > delegated to do what. > [ ] People who capitalize the phrase "Free Software" are annoying. > [ ] The Free Software Foundation is run by a bunch of crazy hippie > communists, and Debian is being taken over by more of the same. > [ ] The Open Source Initiative is run by a bunch of Christian > fundamentalist right-wing gun nuts, and Debian is being taken > over by more of the same. > [ ] I deeply resent whimsy intruding into this questionnaire. > [ ] A person who lost the DPL election twice shouldn't think about > running again. > [ ] No one who lost the DPL election was ever subsequently elected > DPL. > [ ] No one who lost the DPL election twice was ever subsequently > elected DPL. > [ ] Bdale Garbee is unbeatable. > [ ] Bdale Garbee has disappointed me. > [ X ] We should elect a DPL based on his or her platform and > contributions to the project, not based on personality issues. > [ ] A DPL candidate shouldn't make promises in his or her > platform. > [ ] We should elect a DPL who reflects who we want to be, even if > they don't reflect who we are. > [ ] DPL elections are essentially popularity contests. > [ ] There is nothing we can do about the above statement; it's the > nature of the beast. > [ ] Circulating this questionnaire proves that you're unfit to be > Project Leader. > [ ] Circulating this questionnaire demonstrates leadership. > [ X ] Circulating this questionnaire is a cynical attempt to > manipulate the electorate. > [ ] Debian Developers should publicly and prominently campaign for > the person they'd prefer to see as Project Leader. > [ ] Debian Developers should keep their DPL preferences to > themselves. > [ X ] DPL campaigns have increasingly come to adopt traits of > conventional politics. > [ X ] I find previous statement true and not a cause for concern. > [ ] The DPL can barely wipe his nose without consensus. (The DPL > is essentially a figurehead without much real power.) > [ ] Debian's effort at a constitutional system of governance > has been a failure. > [ X ] The Debian Constitution and the apparatuses instituted by it > are basically instruments of last resort, called into play > when our traditional methods of operation fail. > [ ] We'd be better off with a few hundred fewer Developers. > [ ] We'd be better off with more Developers. > [ ] Debian distributes too many packages; we should narrow our > focus. > > Comments: DMUP: DDs should have a clue. People with a clue know what to do / not to do. Electing DPL, based on: Primarily platform, contributions are of less importance. I have removed direct questions about Branden Robinson from this mail -- Rune B. Broberg Feel free to GPG-encrypt email sent to me. Keyid: 0x87CD3DBD
Attachment:
pgpDGUTEssmyT.pgp
Description: PGP signature