Re: All DPL candidates: level of team management [and 1 more messages]

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Re: All DPL candidates: level of team management"):
> Unfortunately, [the constitution] prevents delegations that document
> processes, [...]
> 
> I think that the best solution here is a compromise solution: continue to
> document the team's tasks, processes and interactions in the delegation
> emails, but do this outside of the delegation stricto-sensu, making sure
> that there's a clear separation between the part that describes which
> powers are being delegated, and to whom [the binding/official part of the
> delegation], and the part that describes the current implementation of
> processes by the team [the documentation/unofficial part of the delegation
> email, that should also be available on the team's wiki page].

Neil McGovern writes ("Re: All DPL candidates: level of team management"):
> But for a succinct version, It's basically "you should delegate areas of
> responsibility, not process".

Thanks to Lars for an excellent question and thanks for these clear
answers.  I have stripped a lot of text which softens and explains
your positions in more detail, but my snippage is fair, I hope.

Contrary to what Lars says, I think there is a clear difference
between these two approaches.  ISTM that Lucas is much more "hands-on"
and (for example) and takes much more of a close interest in the
processes adopted by teams, than Neil would do.

Do you both think that's a fair characterisation ?

Ian.