On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:22:06PM +0000, devotee@vote.debian.org wrote:
> The winners are:
> Option 2 "Invite the DAM to further discuss until vote or consensus,
> leading to a new proposal."
which, aiui was the original resolution, namely:
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, nor opportunities to join the project.
We thank Joerg Jaspert for exploring ideas on how to involve
contributors more closely with and within 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 and all thee
contributors to further develop their 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.
Significant changes should only be implemented after consensus
within the project at large has been reached, or when decided by a
general resolution.
That the original resolution got to be choice 2 seems completely bizarre
to me, but whatever.
Looking through the actual votes, it seems somewhat reasonable to collect
them into about seven groups:
a) "consensus before implementation" - 191 votes
(everyone who voted either or both option 1 or 2 above option
3 and FD, and didn't either option 1 or 2 below option 3)
b) "implementation now seems good, but consensus is fine too" - 40 votes
(everyone who voted option 3 highest, and either or both of options
1 or 2 above further discussion)
c) "implement it now and stop talking about it" - 21 votes
(everyone who voted option 3 highest, and both options 1 and 2 equal
or below further discussion)
d) "this vote/these options suck" - 13 votes
(everyone who voted further discussion first)
e) "consensus w/thanks, or implementation, but don't just delay" - 8 votes
(everyone who put option 2, option 3, option 1)
f) "consensus, or implement, but no thanks" - 2 votes
(everyone who put option 1, then 3, then 2)
g) "i abstain" - 2 votes
(Robert Millan and Mark Hymers)
The most common voting patterns were:
2143 - 53 votes (a)
1243 - 53 votes (a)
1342 - 17 votes (a)
3214 - 17 votes (b)
1132 - 12 votes (a)
2134 - 11 votes (a)
2314 - 10 votes (b)
2212 - 9 votes (c)
(note "2212" above, includes equivalent votes like "--1-" and "4414",
etc; the (a),(b),(c) reflects which group I categorised them into above)
Of the various people involved in the topic, many voted in ways you
(or at least I) mightn't expect.
Seconds of the original (and winning) resolution:
Remi Vanicat - didn't vote
Luca Filipozzi - didn't vote
Robert Millan - abstained
Frans Pop - voted the amendment over the original resolution
Jurij Smakov - voted the amendment over the original resolution
Pierre Habouzit - voted the amendment over the original resolution
Raphael Hertzog - voted the amendment over the original resolution
Amaya Rodrigo Sastre - voted the amendment, then further discussion
Nico Golde - voted the amendment, then further discussion
Colin Tuckley - voted for implementation
Interestingly Philipp Kern apparently seconded the original proposal
twice, at #10 and #18... Anyway, counting him just once, that leaves 11 of
the 21 people who proposed/seconded the original resolution voting it #1.
The proposer/seconds of the two amendments ("postpone until
vote/consensus" and "implement") were exactly the same, which presumably
doesn't give much indication on what their intentions were. In the end:
Lucas Nussbaum - voted to postpone
Raphael Hertzog - voted to postpone
Stefano Zacchiroli - voted to postpone
Damyan Ivanov - voted for implementation
Matthew Johnson - voted for implementation
Margarita Manterola - voted the original proposal first
Possibly interesting votes by various position holders (where "----"
means "didn't vote", and going from www.d.o/intro/organization for who
holds what positions):
DPL:
4132 Steve McIntyre
New-maintainer:
--1- Christoph Berg (FD,DAM)
---- Michael Koch (FD)
123- Wouter Verhelst (FD)
--12 Joerg Jaspert (DAM)
---- James Troup (keyring)
---- Jonathan McDowell (keyring)
Debian maintainer keyring team:
---- Joey Hess
1342 Anthony Towns
1342 Anibal Monsalve Salazar
Debian maintainer keyring team, additional commit access:
--1- Christoph Berg (FD,DAM)
--12 Joerg Jaspert (DAM)
---- James Troup (keyring)
---- Ryan Murray (ftpmaster)
2143 Marc Brockschmidt (ex-FD, in d-m Uploaders, not on www.do/intro/org)
ftpmaster:
---- Ryan Murray
--12 Joerg Jaspert
---- Thomas Viehmann (ass't)
4312 Kalle Kivimaa (ass't)
1112 Mark Hymers (ass't)
---- Frank Lichtenheld (ass't)
Technical ctte:
---- Bdale Garbee (chair)
2143 Andreas Barth
---- Ian Jackson
1342 Steve Langasek
---- Manoj Srivastava
1342 Anthony Towns
Secretary:
---- Manoj Srivastava
21-3 Neil McGovern (ass't, ran the vote)
Lots of "didn't vote" in there; and three people with the same ordering as
the final outcome: Andi Barth, Marc Brockshmidt and, hrm, Neil McGovern,
who ran the vote. Interesting...!
Cheers,
aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature