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

Re: Proposal: Recall the Project Leader



Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 03:30, John Goerzen a écrit :
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:26:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >   The debate has been launched on -private, but it's clear to
> > everyone that we were very far from a consensus[2]. So, instead of
> > *beeing consistent* with the *consensus* of the opinions, a so
> > called "external" structure has been launched. Onboard, we see many
> > very well known
>
> You know, this is far from the first time a situation like this has
> happened.
>
> Some others, none of which caused proposals like this to occur,
> included:
>
> * Ubuntu is funding Debian developers due to a disagreement about
>   direction, emphasis, and release practices.  A very real fork,
>   yet with many common developers with Debian.
>
> * Progeny funded Debian developers working on alternative Debian
>   installers, configuration tools, and a host of other items and was
>   led at the time by none other than the founder of Debian (Ian
>   Murdock).  Many of Progeny's employees were and are Debian
>   developers, with a former DPL (Branden) among them.
>
> * Bruce, a former DPL, being involved with a venture capital firm
> that funded Debian developers.
>
> * Debian itself donated $1000 to the Gnome project to fund its
>   development due to a dispute with KDE over Qt licensing.
>   I don't recall this coming with strings such as "can't be spent on
>   programmer time".  So there is even precedent for the project
>   doing this sort of thing.

just let me rephrase it then.

 1. The DPL is the one that appoints the RM as per constitution

 2. The DPL is deeply in a structure that has supposedly nothing to do
    with Debian, hence does its own choices, without needing any sort of
    Debian approval.

 3. That structure wants to pay the RM's.

that's a big conflict of interest. It's IMHO a major fault coming from a 
delegate (and especially the DPL) to take a role in such an 
organisation. It's just not compatible.

If aj's stops beeing a member of dunc-tank, and do not works publicily 
for that dunc-tank, then I remove my second here, he can stay as DPL. 
If he prefers dunc-tank, and work for it, he must not be a delegate 
anymore, and especialy not DPL.

For me, it's not a vote for or against dunc-tank. I'm against it under 
its current form, but there is nothing I can do about it. It's a vote 
about a conflict of interest between the position of beeing the DPL, 
and taking part into dunc.


It's not a recall vote against Mr Towns, it's a recall procedure to ask 
him to make a choice between two uncompatible tasks.
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpfIo8vVbApw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: