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

Re: question for all candidates

Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett (mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [060310 16:58]:
>> Ok. Based on what we've discussed on IRC, you'll admit that Andreas
>> attempted to get at least one person to agree to take responsibility for
>> elmo's role as lead ftp-master without consulting elmo first? I think
>> the difference is largely semantic, but, well.
> Quite interessting that you sent out that mail a few minutes after I
> told you I'm going away from my computer. Well done.

Your complaint was over the fact that you interpreted "replace" as 
meaning elmo would no longer be an ftp-master. I clarified that.

> Anyways, I disagree with that statement. If your cited sentence is
> correct, Andreas has investigated whether someone (and you refused to
> tell who, it might be even someone in the role of an ftp-master) might
> be interessted in becoming lead ftp-master without asking James Troup
> for permission first for that investigation. 

Correct. Or, as I said, "Andreas attempted to get at least one person to
agree to take responsibility for elmo's role as lead ftp-master without
consulting elmo first"

> As far as I know James, it is possible to speak with other people
> about solutions without offending him.  And I can understand if
> Andreas makes a first research round without asking James about each
> candidate first - if there seems to be a competent and willing
> candidate available, there is still enough time to discuss that with
> James. And it is really something quite different whether one "attempt
> to get someone to take over elmo's position" (in other words, hijack
> that), or whether he investigates whether there is someone else who is
> both competent and interessted, and then try to get a common
> agreement.

No, I think it's entirely unacceptable to start asking around for people 
willing to take over someone's responsibilities without first checking 
if they're willing to relinquish them. It's a clear statement that you 
don't think they're performing their duties well enough.

> Oh, BTW, I hope I didn't do anything equally wrong for you when I talked
> to Anthony today about stable point releases on an IRC channel where
> James wasn't present. I know that James doesn't really mind, but you
> might.

Not at all. However, I should probably point out that I'll be doing your 
job as a member of Andreas's DPL team now. I've decided that you simply 
aren't good enough at it, and someone on IRC suggested that I'd do a 
better job than you. You're welcome to hang around, but all the 
difficult stuff is up to me now. Hope you don't mind.

Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.vote@srcf.ucam.org

Reply to: