On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:20:16PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Here are my questions: > > 1. My concern is to propagate Custom Debian Distributions because > I think we should set a stronger focus to the end user. I see > Debian as a missing link between upstream developers and end > users and Custom Debian distributions are a good way to care for > end users. I strongly agree with your premise. In my view, trying to make Debian main all things to all people is to misunderstand the "universal OS" goal. It's awfully damn hard to be all things to all people, after all. Instead, I see Debian operating systems as being fully-capable platforms that can *also* serve as a foundation for more specific tasks. > What are your plans according to Custom Debian Distributions? I guess I'd have to defer to the Hippocratic Oath: "First of all, do no harm." Custom distributions can (and probably will) grow in all sorts of directions whether we want them to or not. But we'll all be better off if we encourage diversity and appreciate their power to bring Debian to new audiences. Furthermore, if we want to take a selfish tack for a moment, if we maintain a high level of cooperation with custom distos based on Debian, they're more likely to listen to us when we ask something of them. I'm think mostly of technical issues here, but the principle could be applied more broadly. > 2. Recently we had some flamewars about concentration of "power" for > some people inside Debian. While I'm much more relaxed than many > others and save my time for work instead of fighting flame wars > I have one certain question here. How do you see the role of > James Troup in the project? I'm not sure I can give you the kind of answer you're looking for. If elected DPL, I would promptly get in touch with every member of our core infrastructure team. The first questions I'd ask of any of these people would be: 1) What can I do to help you do your job better? 2) What do you perceive your role in the project to be? The next thing I'd do would be to communicate the answers I received to the rest of the project (except for anything that was expressed to me in confidence, of course). It blows my mind that no previous DPL has done this. In the unlikely event that a person in the project absolutely refused to deal with me as DPL, then I would communicate that fact to the developers as well. But to be honest I don't think there's anyone in the project who would do this. If there is, I don't think I've met or corresponded with them yet. There are few people on our organization list[1] and there are very few I can't recall having communicated with in the past. Of the ones I can't recall having communicated with, none of them has ever been the subject of a flamewar, to my knowledge. :) > While I think that he did a great job in terms of finding technical > solutions he absolutely fails in communication with people. This is too broad a statement. I've communicated perfectly cordially and efficiently with James many times. So have many others. Anyone who posits that Debian has a "cabal" probably would say James is in it, and they'd have to grant that he must communicate successfully with the other members of that august body -- unless there are exciting tales of schism and betrayal within the cabal that we mere mortals have not been privy to. :) On a more serious note, it's safe to say that there are certainly people who have had trouble communicating with James in the past. There have been people who had trouble communicating with Martin Michlmayr, too. There have been people who had trouble communicating with me. Some of the criticism of James -- and other people with special responsibilities in the project -- that I have seen, from my non-omniscient viewpoint, *has* been misinformed. In large That's what the first two parts of each of the "Why I Am Running" and "What I Will Do" sections of my platform are designed to address. I want to break this zero-sum-game mindset where people are locked in battle with each other, and develop alternative mechanisms for resolving these issues. > This starts with the fact that he is known to actively maintain a > quite long killfile (accompanied with the ability to ignore > requests of people) Two points here: 1) anybody in Debian can ignore pretty much any request from anyone, and the Constitution[2] explicitly authorizes us to do so 2) I can't blame a person for killfiling someone, if a person mailing them is good at pushing a person's buttons. It's emotionally draining to have to defend yourself all the time. Where 2) becomes a problem is when private mail is the preferred means of communicating with someone in their official capacity. As DPL, I'd like to fix that. I think we should decouple people's personal mail addresses from their roles just as machines are[3]. That, of course, does mean that we need teams for just about everything of importance, but is that really so bad in a volunteer project (in practice, we already *do* have teams for practically everything important anyway)? > and ends with the inability to accept critics to his person. This is an overreaching statement. How can you know whether or not he accepts criticism? That he reacts to it (or not), doesn't tell you what he does with it internally. I think it is polite, to say nothing of expedient, to refrain from speculating as to the psychological processes of our fellow developers except as a last resort. > While I have no personal problems to cope with those people I > noticed that this behaviour of a person who is doing not only one > important job for the project does harm to the Debian project in > general. I had several private discussions with outsiders. For > instance one opinion was that the persion would not apply as New > Maintainer as long as James Troup is ruling Debian. (Please > note: I do not think that James Troup is really ruling Debian - I > was just quoting.) You're making pretty strong statements for someone who claims to have not been personally mistreated by James. It's fine to be an advocate for people who do feel that way, but I think such advocacy needs to stick to objectively demonstrable facts. > So what are your plans to enhance communication with people on > important positions in Debian and how do you think that important > jobs might be split onto different shoulders? I'm going to refer to my answer to question 2) above, and to my platform[4] to answer this question. > 3. Do you think Debian should continue to support non-free? I think Debian should do what the Developers resolve to do regarding this issue. It is far too divisive and contentious a matter for a DPL to decide by decree. Since I suspect you're expecting a personal statement, I'll say this: In the forthcoming vote, I expect to vote in favor of removing non-free from our distribution. The ballot returns will be public in hat vote, as they are in every GR vote except for Project Leader elections, and I will be very curious to see the results. > 4. Does your normal live allow sparsing time for Debian leadership > which seems to include much additional work (perhaps you will not > be able to continue on working on your packages) and does your > current employer accept your intention. In order to accept the added responsibilities of Project Leader, I have resigned as SPI Treasurer and, as I stated in my Platform, am transitioning Debian XFree86 package maintenance to a team-oriented effort. As a matter of fact, the latest upload to unstable (4.3.0-3) was built not by me, but by Joshua Kwan, who stepped in because my home workstation was experiencing memory problems. My employer's pretty used to the thought of me as Debian Project Leader, since I've run for the position every year I've been employed by Progeny[5]. :) I understand that there is a standardized document for employers to sign that states their recognizition that an employee DPL must be able to act independently. I don't anticipate having any problems getting my immediate supervisor to sign it. I can walk over to the CEO's office to get it signed as well (Progeny is a small company), and ask Ian Murdock if he'd like to chip in for good measure, too. In short, I am not at all concerned about my employer bringing undue pressure on me in an effort to influence the Debian Project. > A. Meta-question: Do you know that your jpb as a Debian leader has > the consequence to travel in several countries all over the world > which might lead to the situation that some countries handle you > like a criminal by taking your finger prints? I personally would > not like to be handled like a criminal and thus I did not accepted > the invitation to a conference in Texas. I'd been meaning to raise this issue: Do any of our Brazilian developers raising this think it would be possible to petition the Brazilian government for a waiver of the "fingerprint all U.S. citizens" policy as applied to Debian Developers for the Debconf 4 event? I realize it may sound audacious, but I don't see any harm in it. Debian and Free Software in general have done a lot for Brazil (a lot for the U.S., too, but the Microsoft- and Oracle- owned press wouldn't dare let you know it) and who knows, it might work. Especially if we get some press about it, which would do us some good even if it didn't work. I am deeply uncomfortable with being fingerprinted and otherwise bio-catalogged, but if that is what it takes to carry the Debian message around the world and serve this Project, then I will accept it. I am apprehensive about injecting real-world political opinions into this particular discussion, so if you'd really like to know what I think of the present U.S. administration, please ask in another forum. [1] http://www.debian.org/intro/organization [2] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/debian-devel-announce-200401/msg00011.html [4] http://people.debian.org/~branden/dpl/campaign/2004/platform.xhtml#s3p2 [5] http://www.progeny.com/ -- G. Branden Robinson | Convictions are more dangerous Debian GNU/Linux | enemies of truth than lies. branden@debian.org | -- Friedrich Nietzsche http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature