Re: Questions to candidates
* Marc Haber <mh+debian-vote@zugschlus.de> [2004-03-04 09:03]:
> 2a. Do you see the concentration of many important roles on a few
> people as a problem? As example, I'd like to name DAM, keyring
If they cannot successfully perform their duties, then this is
certainly a problem, yes. See below.
> Additionally, these teams don't seem to communicate well
> internally. Do you see a problem when a request posed to a team is
> rejected along the lines of "try again with another member"?
I think teams in general should (and do) agree on things. However,
the world is not binary, and sometimes it's hard to give a strict
"yes" or "no". In such cases, I think it's perfectly okay to say "I
personally think FOO, but another member of the team may disagree with
this". In your specific case of having a package rejected by one
ftpmaster saying basically "try again with another member", I think it
would have been better for this ftpmaster to ask other people of the
team and come to an agreement.
> The situation might be influenced as well by the fact that there
> are people on multiple important roles in Debian, and these people are
> notoriously overworked. Wouldn't it be better to allow only one or two
> important roles per person? What would you define an "important
> role"?
I don't think that a rigid rule like "only X roles per person" would
work. There are some people who can handle X roles perfectly while
others wouldn't. It's the same with maintaining packages. Should
there be a maximum number of packages someone may maintain? I don't
think so, because there is no magic number which works for everyone.
I have seen plenty of cases where maintainers do not have enough time
to maintainer their _single_ package while other maintainers maintain
10 or 15 packages really well.
Back to important roles. Just to give an example why "only X roles
per person" would not work. Colin Watson does QA, BTS and release
work and is doing a _very fine_ job at it. I cannot remember any
complaints about his work. Myself, I'm handling the NM Front Desk, do
QA and act as DPL.
Rather than having a rigid rule like "only X roles per person", I
think we have to clearly identify who is overworked, so that we can
then approach the problem. As I described in my platform
(http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/platforms/tbm), section "Internal -
Core Teams, Delegates, Communication, Transparency", I believe many
core teams do not have enough man power, and I am working with them to
add more people.
> Will you try to improve this situation during your term of office?
> What do you intend to do?
Yes, please see my platform for more details. I will clearly identify
who is overworked and help to find addition man power. I will also
find out if there are other ways to help them carry out their tasks
(for example by providing them with certain infrastructure). All of
these coordination activities require person skills which I possess.
> How will you answer if somebody asks you about your opinion on
> "Debian being actually run by a cabal of at most six people"?
There is a group of people who do much work and control many things,
but I don't see the project as being controlled by a small group.
There are many people who can make great contributions (see below).
> What would be your answer if somebody would suggest amending the
> constitution to move some of the "important roles" from being
> delegates of the DPL to being elected by the body of the
> developers?
I doubt electing people would work very well, simply because there is
often a lack of people willing to carry out a specific task (so who
would you elect), and electing does not ensure that you create a team
which can actually work together. However, as DPL, I am listening to
everyone and take this information into account when finding people
for important roles. Also, this task is not limited to the DPL.
> the DPL vote is the only way a mere mortal developer can influence
> the distribution of important roles in the Debian project.
I don't believe this is true. I joined Debian only a few years ago,
and I did not have any special power or control at all. I first got
involved in New Maintainer as an Application Manager and later helped
out with the Front Desk. The same goes for my QA work. I did not
need the DPL or anyone else - I influenced the distribution of roles
myself by getting involved and helping out. I know some people
perceive it to be difficult to join an important role, but many
examples show that it is indeed possible. As argued in my platform, I
am working with people to help them join important roles, and to add
more man power to overworked groups. I can do this because I can
interact with many different people and know how they work.
--
Martin Michlmayr
tbm@cyrius.com
Reply to: