Re: Question to all candidates: rotation on positions of power

[Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org>]

Hi Felix,

On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 09:45 -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 5:28 AM Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
> wrote:
> > 
> > What do you think of the reform of the Technical Committee that
> > introduced a limit to the time people can serve in, and would you
> > consider applying a similar policy to other positions of power in
> > Debian?
> 
> I am a big fan of term limits.
[...]
> When people remain in power for too long, they also become tone-deaf.
[...]
> I hope to find enough volunteers to help the project leader evaluate
> future delegations. An Appointments Committee—with at least five but
> no more than twelve members—would collect broad and public input. If
> enough folks are willing to serve, our number of delegates would
> swell
> and still leave us with extra candidates.
> 
> A future referendum could then introduce term limits for delegates,
> but first we need a deeper pool of replacements ready to serve.

You only mention delegates which have a formally easy way to get
replaced: the project leader can just do so.

But we have other positions of power: maintainership over packages as
an example. In case of disagreement, the bar to change maintainers is
higher than for changing delegates, but the Technical Committee can do
so.

Do you think that an Appointments Committee should also handle package
maintainership and should we have term limits for how long people can
maintain packages, in particular core packages like gcc, libc, dpkg,
apt, ...?

Ansgar