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

Re: Proposal: Recall the Project Leader

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Lo=EFc?= Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr>
>  So, did the Debian Project Leader take the decision to fund our RMs,
>  for example with Debian's money?  Did he take the decision to
>  officially request funding?     NO.

How is the DPL empowered to take that decision when it is so obviously
against some developers' opinions?

>  Instead, he did his best to take off his DPL hat, make a private
>  initiative which is directed towards helping Debian, without the need
>  of any DPL special power.

Yes, instead of working as DPL to find a compromise, he yet again seeks
to direct debian funding away from debian's control and its established
partners.  Even IMO-reasonable suggestions, such as goal-based rather
than time-based payments, seemed to be ignored.

>  What does he get for trying his best to gather more support for Debian?
>  A "let's fire the DPL" GR.

If this DPL's best does not include revising his proposals or seeking
compromise, then it's time for a new DPL.  This will get support for
more than the Dunk Tank reason.

>  Why on earth are you giving a shit to some random broken article?

I agree, the article inaccuracies are not a major reason to support
the recall, but it is likely to be the first of many if the DPL is
heading a debian proposal which has been taken outside the project.

>  I'm deeply disappointed by the french cabal supporting this DPL
>  bashing.  Please do feel responsible for the fate of the project after
>  such a stupid vote.

When I asked for likely seconds for a recall a while ago (now
made obsolete by this proposal), I was surprised by the number of
French-sounding supporters.  I myself am probably a francophile.
I wonder, is there something about this brash DPL which is particularly
un-French?  One for the sociologists/anthropologists, perhaps?

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: