On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:44:29AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > Notably, the notion of a "DPL team" is absent from all your > platforms. Without trying to suggest that this is a fallacy, I have > a few questions about this: > > Have you considered working with a "DPL team" and if so, why have > you decided against including such plans in your platform? > I'm not entirely clear which version of "DPL team" you're talking about - there's been a range of suggestions in the past on how this could work. It's not a deliberate exclusion from my platform, but it's not something I would set at the heart of what I intend, which is somewhat broader than a simple team which people are 'in' or 'out' of. > On the other hand, if you're open to the idea, what do you think > worked well and what did not work in previous attempts? How would > you approach a "DPL team"? The IRC channel #debian-dpl has been useful, even just as a place to throw some ideas around. I've been involved in that initiative since the early days, and it was useful. Regular meetings seemed to dry up, however. I'd be keen to see anyone who wants to come along and help, do so! > Do you have other ideas involving close cooperation with a few > people for increasing the efficiency of the DPL position, especially > since I understand none of you will be working on this full-time (… > which would be a whole different issue…)? There's various tasks that other people simply can't do, but as I mentioned in another mail: ----- I'm keen to try and make the DPL job more sustainable. That was my primary concern when deciding to run the first time, and also this time. However, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. So, I intend to offload whatever I can get away with from the DPL job. (A slight footnote: I think the DPL should still be accountable to make things happen, but not to do those things themselves. I'd like to try and devolve away tasks, but still make sure they're happening) ----- Neil --
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature