Re: still more questions for the candidates
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:59:04PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Raul Miller's @debian.org email address bounced for ages, it was
> pointed out to him but he didn't fix it; at the same time, he was
> posting to -vote and other lists. However, he did not maintain his
> packages at all, which lead to them being orphaned.
As I said at the time, I did not have proper access [a secure machine to
use my private key on] to fix that -- eventually, when I did get proper
access, my key was rejected due to problems on the server. Eventually,
somone on the admin team fixed the problem for me.
> I think that members of the Technical Committee should be examples
> other people can follow, but I don't think that every current member
> is like that (However, I'm not saying that all members aren't like
> this). I think it's good to be conservative of who to admit to the
> Technical Committee, but when the policy is so conservative that many
> members used to be active and good examples years ago but no longer
> are, then something's wrong imho.
Example to follow for what? Good security procedures?
> I have not come up with a good solution yet, otherwise I'd have
> proposed it already. Perhaps some rotating scheme of who is part of
> the Technical Committee might be a good idea. See my reply to Raul.
Where you basically referred to yet another post which basically came
back to your criticisms of the members, not what it's doing.
It seems to me that you have nothing relevant to say about what the
committee has been doing, and are instead concerned only about its
membership.
Also, here's some of what you had to say in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/debian-vote-200403/msg00093.html
No, I am extremely disappointed with the role of the Technical
Committee. I actually talked to Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>
about this at FOSDEM two weeks ago.
Which tells me absolutely nothing about what the committee should be
doing different.
When I became DPL last year, I wanted to use my delegation power to
re-active the committee, but found out that the Technical Committee
is exempted as per the constitution.
You never said anything to the committee -- if all you wanted to do was
replace committee members, this makes sense. If you had some insight into
what the committee should be doing, why didn't you say anything to us?
Having people on the Technical Committee who don't have a single
package in the archive or whose packages have been orphaned because
they were not maintained is simply not how it should be!
As one of those people -- while I was "unavailable", I kept an eye on
my packages and made sure that I didn't have any release critical bugs.
[Yes, if I had had a release critical bug I would have put a LOT of
energy into getting it resolved.] I did have some other bugs, but when
I was able to post uploads, I wanted to do more research to make sure
that I was introducing proper fixes. When I lost access, this wasn't a
big deal, initially. When I regained access they were old enough that
the packages were orphaned and other people picked them up.
However, I'm having keysigning problems again (this time due to a mix
of what might be kernel, hardware or debian problems -- partially my
fault for getting bleeding edge hardware when an opportunity opened in
my budget), so I'm not prepared to do much signing right now.
Right now, I'm somewhat involved upstream on one package and one potential
package. That I'm not listed as a maintainer on any packages doesn't
mean that I'm not contributing to debian.
* * * * *
I'm somewhat bothered that the only criticisms you have of the Technical
Committee are aimed at its membership.
If you had specific criticisms of what it does, or suggestions of what it
will do, I would have no objection to criticisms of myself, or of others,
which relate to these substantial issues. But, if you're only concerned
about the people, and have nothing to say about how its achieving its
goals, that tells me more about you than it does about what the committee
should be doing.
In summary -- thanks for telling me about how you approach this kind
of issue.
--
Raul
Reply to: