[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question on DPL delegations.


On 26/03/14 at 07:31 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 05:44:55PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > 
> > Internally, we would need to adjust, but I'm quite sure that we would
> > manage. Actually, the lack of a DPL might make everybody feel more 
> > enabled/empowered to solve problems that are usually deferred to the
> > DPL, which could be a good thing.
> Hi Lucas and Neil,
> without DPL, there would be no DPL delegations.  I have a question for you
> related to delegations.
> When a delegate is completely inactive as a delegate, do you think that his
> delegation should be renewed ?

The DPL makes the final decision about delegations, but it should
generally be the conclusion of a discussion with the team. Delegations
without the team's agreement should be limited to extreme cases, for
teams which are very dysfunctional. It happened in the past, but I hope
that this will never happen again.

There are good reasons for keeping people whose activity level has
reduced in a team. For example, in cases where the team has to make
difficult policy decisions (e.g. DAM or ftpmasters), they can serve as
the team's long term memory, and provide additional viewpoints.

There are also good reasons for not keeping them in the team: they might
be perceived as "badge collectors" by the rest of the team, or as people
who like to express their opinion and influence the team's decisions but
do not do the resulting work. That can have a very negative impact on
the atmosphere inside the team.

It's difficult to draw a general line, and I believe that each case
should be examined separately, with the delegate in question, and with
the rest of the team.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: