I certainly don’t think it will be possible to create both Foundations in one term, and it may not be possible to even finish creating the US Foundation in one DPL term, but a lot of progress can be made. In my platform, I estimated 6-12 months, but there are things that are out of our control. These things include waiting for approvals from municipalities, working on the details, and time spent building consensus on the details. I commit that if I am elected DPL, that I will run for a second term, and finish the creation of the US Foundation if it hasn’t already been completed, whether or not I am re-elected as DPL. In my first term, I will also begin working with European developers to create the European Foundation but have no expectation of completing that during the first-term. Speaking of a second-term, I believe that because the DPL job involves a large learning curve that can take over half of a DPL’s first term, prospective DPLs should be open to the idea of serving two consecutive terms. In the past, I’ve wondered if we should go as far as considering two-year DPL terms. Since then I have come to value the status quo and the annual project-wide discussions that the election stimulates. Also, annual elections give us regular opportunities to assess our progress and priorities so we can decide whether we want a change of direction. Staffing-wise, as I said in my platform, I’m projecting a half-time (20 hours a week) paid staff member to aid the DPL and related teams. If someone doesn’t believe it’s appropriate to hire a part-time admin to aid with bureaucratic tasks like finance and legal paperwork, they should not vote for me. Again, before hiring anyone, I would consult with Project Members, as is required by the Debian Constitution for all major expenditures. Funding-wise, Debian has managed to have an overall positive cash flow for many years, without any active non-purpose-driven fundraising. IE: We’ve raised funds for conferences, and for specific goals like funding interns, but we’ve never really done project-wide fundraising because we’ve never really needed to. Despite no active fundraising for the general fund, we have more than enough funds to hire a part-time admin. [1] I am curious, what was meant by “yet another Debian mess”? In my eyes, the biggest Debian “messes”, are the endless bikeshedding sessions that end up going nowhere. As I’ve stated earlier, I’m not a fan of unnecessary GRs. If we can find a way to assess the project’s will without them, we should, just as I thought Jonathan believed, based on his 2019 DPL campaign rebuttal [2].: "I think that GRs should remain a last resort and that there are better ways to gauge the community's stance on a topic when you need it. If a poll is needed, it's better to do a proper poll than to use a GR as a generic tool." I will say that during the development work to create the Foundations, if we discover legal reasons that would require us to change the Constitution, I would have no issue seeking a GR, and working to build consensus to make the necessary changes. Cheers, Brian [1] - https://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/annual-reports/2018.pdf [2] - https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/platforms/jcc
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature