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

Re: Question to Brian: Why do you need to be DPL to set up foundations?




On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:43 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:

> On 3/17/20 4:10 AM, Brian Gupta wrote:
> > 1) By making it my platform, it should be a much lighter-weight method
> >    for people to express their opinions than a GR. If this proves
> >    contentious, I can always withdraw my candidacy rather than push
> >    through a tough vote that splits the community. (In this case, I'd
> >    rather back off and take however long it takes to build a rough
> >    consensus.)
> > 
> > 2) I don't believe a GR is needed, as my current plan doesn't require
> >    any changes to the constitution
> > 
> > 3) As I alluded, it would really only be practical with the explicit
> >    support of the DPL.  Being DPL would guarantee that support.
> > 
> > 4) It gives project members options on how they vote. If I am elected
> >    DPL, that would likely be a clear sign the project supports my
> >    proposal. If I was ranked below "None of the above", that's another
> >    clear message. Finally, if most people ranked me above "None of the
> >    above, even if I wasn't first choice, I'd assume that as a signal of
> >    support for the proposal and would try to work with the elected DPL
> >    to implement the proposal.
>
> Brian,
>
> Thanks for bringing the topic of a Debian foundation, and highlighting
> the past problems with SPI (I kind of was shocked to read about the
> paypal account, I somehow missed what happened...).
>

If I wrote it in a way that you found shocking, I did not intend for it to 
be. SPI raised a valid concern when looked at from the point of view of an 
organization that is home for over 40 projects. They wouldn't be doing 
their jobs if they continued to allow a single project special-treatment. 

When I first heard about their concerns, I couldn't understand why SPI felt 
the need to make the change, considering the long history between Debian 
and SPI. As time passed, I came to understand SPI's point of view and came
to agree, and expect that if I had been in their role, I would have ended up
with the same thoughts.

I regret, that to some, this appears to be an SPI vs Debian debate. It is 
not. I expect the relationship between SPI to continue into the indefinite
future.

This is about the fact that Debian has needs that require "special-casing",
that will be difficult to fulfill from an organization that isn't singularly
focused on Debian.

> Sorry for this, but I very much don't think it's a good idea to mix a a
> DPL election, and assume that people's votes will reflect their will to
> setup a foundation or not. Maybe a lot of people will prefer candidate X
> or Y before you, but will still would like to move ahead with the
> foundation idea. The same way, some may like you, but may not like the
> foundation thing.
>
> Moreover, as this is the main thing if your platform, we don't have a
> clue about the rest of your intentions, and how you see the DPL job.
>
> I would have very much prefer if you had discuss this as a separate
> topic, and made sure that the next future DPL would support you, or if
> you nominated yourself for the DPL election, and voiced your intend to
> make a GR about creating a foundation (but not make it the only topic of
> your platform).
>
> Anyway, thanks for this topic again, and I really hope you make the
> foundation thing happen, being the DPL or not. :)
>

I will reiterate this before the election, but people do have choices when 
voting. 

1) If you want Foundations, and want me as DPL, please rank me the highest.

2) If you want Foundations, but don't want me as DPL, please just put your 
favorite candidate(s) above me, but please do place me above "None of the 
Above".

3) If you don't want Debian Foundations rank me below "None of the Above". 

The only option I am asking people not to consider is electing me as DPL 
without a mandate to work on the Foundations. If you are opposed to the
formation of Debian Formations, I'd ask that you please rank me below
"None of the Above".

Cheers,
Brian


On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:43 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:
On 3/17/20 4:10 AM, Brian Gupta wrote:
> 1) By making it my platform, it should be a much lighter-weight method
>    for people to express their opinions than a GR. If this proves
>    contentious, I can always withdraw my candidacy rather than push
>    through a tough vote that splits the community. (In this case, I'd
>    rather back off and take however long it takes to build a rough
>    consensus.)
>
> 2) I don't believe a GR is needed, as my current plan doesn't require
>    any changes to the constitution
>
> 3) As I alluded, it would really only be practical with the explicit
>    support of the DPL.  Being DPL would guarantee that support.
>
> 4) It gives project members options on how they vote. If I am elected
>    DPL, that would likely be a clear sign the project supports my
>    proposal. If I was ranked below "None of the above", that's another
>    clear message. Finally, if most people ranked me above "None of the
>    above, even if I wasn't first choice, I'd assume that as a signal of
>    support for the proposal and would try to work with the elected DPL
>    to implement the proposal.

Brian,

Thanks for bringing the topic of a Debian foundation, and highlighting
the past problems with SPI (I kind of was shocked to read about the
paypal account, I somehow missed what happened...).

If I wrote it in a way that you found shocking, I did not intend for it to be. SPI raised a valid concern when looked at from the point of view of an organization that is home for over 40 projects. They wouldn't be doing their jobs if they continued to allow a single project special-treatment. When I first heard about these concerns, I couldn't understand why SPI felt the need to make the change, considering the long history between Debian and SPI, but as time passed, I came to understand SPI's point of view and came to agree.

I regret, that to some, this appears to be an SPI vs Debian debate. It is not.

Debian has and will have further needs that require "special-casing", that we can not expect SPI to readily fulfill.

Sorry for this, but I very much don't think it's a good idea to mix a a
DPL election, and assume that people's votes will reflect their will to
setup a foundation or not. Maybe a lot of people will prefer candidate X
or Y before you, but will still would like to move ahead with the
foundation idea. The same way, some may like you, but may not like the
foundation thing.

Moreover, as this is the main thing if your platform, we don't have a
clue about the rest of your intentions, and how you see the DPL job.

I would have very much prefer if you had discuss this as a separate
topic, and made sure that the next future DPL would support you, or if
you nominated yourself for the DPL election, and voiced your intend to
make a GR about creating a foundation (but not make it the only topic of
your platform).

Anyway, thanks for this topic again, and I really hope you make the
foundation thing happen, being the DPL or not. :)

I will reiterate this before the election, but people do have choices when voting. 

1) If you want Foundations, and want me as DPL, please rank me the highest.

2) If you want Foundations, but don't want me as DPL, please just put your favorite candidate(s) above me, but please do place me above "None of the Above".

3) If you don't want Debian Foundations rank me below "None of the Above". 

The only option I am asking people not to consider is electing me as DPL without a mandate to work on the Foundations. If you wish me to be DPL, but are opposed to the formation of Debian Formations, I'd ask that you please rank me below "None of the Above".

Cheers,
Brian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: