Re: Questions for Jeroen van Wolffelaar and Andreas Schuldei
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <email@example.com> wrote:
> I don't think it'd be particularly well-recieved if someone who, after
> all, was not elected, would assume leadership. Regardless of the
> constitutional issues, it was clear that there was some bit of angst
> among DD's during last year's campaigning period about that very issue.
You wouldn't have been assuming leadership of the project in any formal
manner. However, you've made it clear that you think that the DPL team
needs leadership - you had the opportunity to provide coordination and
make sure that things got done, but chose not to.
> So, concluding, just because I wasn't DPL. Similarly, if you'd elect me,
> you'll get me, and not possibly maybe one of the DPL team members whose
> names I'll announce in a few days. I'll still allow the DPL team members
> to pick up things they want to pick up as far as they can do so without
> special privileges, as they see fit.
But surely the point of a team is for people to be able to pick up the
slack if someone can't cope? If you believe that the DPL should still be
a single point of failure, what's the point in electing you?
Matthew Garrett | firstname.lastname@example.org