On Mon, Feb 26, 2007, John Lightsey wrote:
> 1) Do you believe past DPL's have used the power of delegation
> effectively?
Hard to tell. I believe additional delegation would have solved the
unresponsiveness issues we have been having for several years now, but
I wouldn't say it was the only way to deal with it. I believe past DPLs
have failed to address the issue, though.
> 2) Are there any current delegations you plan to change?
If everything goes well, I plan to only appoint additional delegates
so that all teams are bigger and more responsive. Until I have had
reports on how these new teams are performing, if have no reason to want
to replace a delegation.
> 3) Are there any developers with positions of authority who should be
> given the official sanction of being delegated this authority?
I must admit I do not know for sure which positions are delegated and
which currently aren't. In general, I believe that any position that
gives its holder the power to block the work of other developers should
be delegated. I am thinking about FTP-master and wanna-build access, for
instance.
> 4) Do you believe that ongoing delegations should be limited in time or
> indefinite?
I don't believe it matters much, since replacements are done at
the DPL's discretion. If the DPL gets sufficient feedback on how the
delegates are performing, he/she can decide whether they should be
replaced or not, at any time.
> 5) Do you feel it is better to delegate additional developers to an area
> of responsibility or to replace delegates when that area is not being
> handled effectively.
As I said earlier, I believe in additional delegates rather than
replacements. If it appears to be impossible for the delegates to work
together, then replacing the delegate not performing adequately might be
the only solution.
> 5.1) In new areas that cannot be effectively handled by a single
> developer, would it be better to delegate the authority to a team or to
> delegate the authority to an individual and allow that individual to
> form their own team?
I don't see much difference in both approaches. One cannot really say
there is a huge waiting line for delegated positions, so they'd probably
end up being very similar teams of people who are able to work together.
> 6) Will you explicitly rescind and redelegate all delegated positions if
> you are elected DPL?
No.
> 7) Will you resign from any delegated positions you currently hold if
> you are elected DPL?
I am not a delegate.
> 7.1) Do you feel that section 2.1.2, namely "that the Leader cannot
> appoint themselves as their own Delegate", should be understood to mean
> that the DPL should not hold any delegated positions even when those
> delegations were made by a previous DPL?
I would need to know the rationale for 2.1.2 in order to answer. Do
we know what 2.1.2 is supposed to prevent? I would certainly prefer the
DPL did not hold any delegated positions during his/her term, but then I
would also find it acceptable for him/her to regain that position at the
end of the DPL term.
> 8) Do you feel that more rapid turnover in delegated positions would be
> beneficial or detrimental to the project?
I would like to try with additional fresh blood first. Turnover has
the drawback that humans do not like to be replaced, and communicating
information to the new members of the team might be easier if the
ancients are still in place.
> 9) Is there anything about your approach to delegates which will make
> your administration different from those of past DPLs that was not
> mentioned?
Two things, I believe:
* more delegates
* mandatory reporting
More information can be found in my platform, when published.
Regards,
--
Sam.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature