Hi Lars, Thanks for kicking off the questions this year! On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 08:49:41PM +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > For all DPL candidates: > > We have a number of delegated teams. How detailed should the > delegations be? I've written my view of the constitution in quite a detailed post at: https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/01/msg00044.html But for a succinct version, It's basically "you should delegate areas of responsibility, not process". > What is the appropriate level of oversight, management, and control > that the DPL and the project in general should have for deciding what > the teams work on, and how they do their job? Firstly, I think it's important to note that the DPL should not be *deciding* what individual people work on, or how they do their job. It's absolutely against how we work as a project. However, there is a role for the DPL to guide what they believe (through their electoral mandate) to be the best path we should be following as a distribution. It's also the job of the DPL to enable things to happen. The DPL should ensure that the teams are being responsive, and that the teams are in good health. Ensuring that a particular team isn't being a pinch point and unreasonably blocking progress in an area is an important aspect. If there is concern in that area, then the DPL should try and work with the team to resolve it, attempting to find more people or money to help, or seeing if there's a way forward that can be agreed by everyone involved. Specifically on oversight, I think it's important that teams send out regular bits mails, and would encourage teams to do so. However, this is separate from "control" of delegates. In volunteer projects it's important to remember that you cannot force people to do anything: I prefer a constructive relationship rather than a dictatorial one :) Neil --
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature