Re: Possible amendment for Debian Contributors concept (was: Call for seconds: Suspension of the changes of the Project's membership procedures.)
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 09:21:57AM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> I really dislike the negative tone of the original proposed resolution,
> so I am thinking of proposing this as an alternative option.
Thank you for proposing this option. I really like it's constructive tone.
> The text I'm thinking about is currently this:
> | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> | not working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not
> | provided by the project with as much help as might be possible, useful
> | or required.
> | .
> | We thank Joerg Jaspert for exploring ideas on how to involve
> | contributors more closely with the project so that they can get both
> | recognition and the necessary tools to do their work.
> | .
> | We realize that the proposal posted to the debian-devel-announce
> | mailinglist is not yet finalized and may not have the support of a large
> | part of our community. We invite the DAM to further develop his ideas
> | in close coordination with other members of the project, and to present
> | a new and improved proposal on the project's mailinglists in the future,
> | at least two weeks prior to any planned implementation.
I would like this to be phrased a bit stronger. IMHO any major change in how
project membership is handeld should be endorsed by the whole project by GR.
Would you be willing to add something like this?
I think it would be important to phrase it in a way that only *major* changes
like adding whole new classes of members or fundamentally changeing things
agreed upon in prior GRs require a GR. As to not try to micro manage the ability
of the DAM and the NM comitee to adjust their processes as they see fit.
Thanks for bringing some sanity to this discussion!
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.
Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
~ Samuel Beckett ~