Re: Proposal - Project infrastructure team procedures
* Manoj Srivastava (email@example.com) [080502 15:45]:
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 11:51:53 +0200, Andreas Barth <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> > * Russ Allbery (email@example.com) [080502 01:27]:
> > Why not making it the other way, allowing the DPL to remove people if
> > he wants?
> Well, that does not sound like a delegation. And as all powers
> flow as powers of the DPL, delegated to other people -- I think the DPL
> ought to be actively involved in delegation.
I'm happy enough if the DPL can stop delegating further on. That's by
far more practical.
May I ask the question the other way round: Why stop any working team on
adding new members only because the DPL is currently too busy to approve
that new member? (Of course, if the team disagrees within itself, or
whatever, the DPL is the instance being able to make a decision.)
> > So teams can expand themselfs (like the release team
> > regularly does), but the DPL can still make sure that no unwanted
> > people are delegated there.
> Well, as I read the constitution, the added team members do not
> really have the powers themselves, but are sub-delegates or assistants,
> and the delegated folks have the responsibility.
So, do you think that I am Release Manager, and if so, have any power as
that, and if so, why do I have powers? (Subdelegated via aj -> vorlon ->
Same for Stable Release Manager, please (which is especially funny,
because I think there was nothing except self-proclamaition on that).