[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question to candidates that signed the Vancouver plan as candidate DPL

On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 03:53:55PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Did you sign on the assumption it has been reviewed by the security team,
> or did you know they had not been consulted ? Did you make some
> investigations ?

Joey was invited to the meeting but could not make it. He was on
the list of people who should get to see it right away, though. I
had asked two times if he had gotten a copy yet, and it was me
who suggested to appologize to Joey personally when we noticed
that it had been forgotten after all.

That said, my signing of the proposal had nothing to do with joey
having seen it or not.

By supporting/signing this I wanted to underline that the release
team had my trust and support in going forward with proposing it
to the broad public. 

> Ftp-master and release team are well within their right to issue their
> proposed plan without consulting others team. 

Proposing the proposal is really consulting others, isn't it?

> However, you signed in
> your quality of DPL-candidate and the DPL role is to get advice from 
> relevant parties before endorsing a plan.
> So, will you act differently if you are elected ?

Being a leader means (in this context) to find motivated and
qualified people to do the work and to empower them. 

       v 1: give or delegate power or authority to; "She authorized her
            assistant to sign the papers" [syn: {authorise}, {authorize}]
       2: give qualities or abilities to [syn: {endow}, {indue}, {gift},
           {invest}, {endue}]

That implyes that you trust them to do their work. You train them
and give them the power to make mistakes and to learn from them,
without janking the delegation right away. You let them grow in
their task and let them shape and form their area of work
themselfs.  You don't double check on them constantly, since that
spells out "You are a looser, I don't trust you to do one thing
right on your own!" since it would produce loosers who would not
get one thing right on their own.

Having explained that, I can answer your question: No, i will not
act differently when elected. I think the release team is highly
qualified, motivated and wants the best for Debian. They made
a mistake when wording the proposal and I am convinced they will
learn form that. They are working with the people who are unhappy
with the proposal in its current form and I believe that together
they will find a good, workable solution for all.

As I explained elsewhere, I made mistakes in the process, too. I
will try to learn from them, and not make them again.

But then, I dared to *do* something and things are changing and
improving. Changing something is allways painfull and comes at a
price. But the alternative, not to change, brings certain and
slow decline and death. That hurts, too. Do we want that? I

Reply to: