Re: Proposal - defer changes to Debian membership procedures to after the release of Lenny.
Le Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:06:53PM +0200, Robert Millan a écrit :
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:03:21PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > Since such GR would go through the usual procedure, I don't think asserting
> > that there will be a second GR needs to be part of this GR. In fact, it may
> > even have contradictory results (e.g. if after Lenny is released nobody is
> > interested in proposing a new GR anymore).
> >
> > So I would suggest leaving #2 out of the proposal.
>
> Or maybe just s/will/may/ ?
Le Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:42:50PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
>
> You should probably point to a specific mail (web archives and/or
> message-id).
> I'm not sure that it's the right way to solve this issue. What about
> deciding that changing the procedures is out of the scope of the DAM
> delegation?
>
> Also, there's the hipothetical problem that Joerg could just re-send his
> mail to avoid your proposed GR.
Good morning Robert, Lucas, and everybody.
I am much opened to changes, but let's minimize traffic: just amend and
I'll second :)
I think it is important to freeze the decisions to that things can coool
down. I would prefer that this GR is as neutral and as minimal as
possible, but the most important is to unite and send the message that it
is not the administration who take such important decisions.
The current situation is:
- We do not know clearly what is decided and what is open to
negociation.
- Within the teams that are said to have participated to the decisions
announced by Joerg, we do not know who support them and who does not.
- We have not been informed about until when we are can make comments,
and to what extent they will not be dismissed without answer.
Let's stop the precipitation so that we can ignore for a while the long
thread on debian-project without fearing that we do not recognise the
Debian project when we wake up next morning.
I am sure that the Project can find a solution that will satify the
account managers and the many persons hoping for a change, but this
requires time, exchange, less pressure and an open discussion on which
we can construct the instead of just hoping to amend.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: