Path: csiph.com!goblin3!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: I've been removed from the Python team
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 00:50:01 +0200
Message-ID: <qeUPL-1B8-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <qevy1-6hR-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qeQ9s-39m-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <qeQCu-3Wq-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debian@kitterman.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.13.0-63-generic; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; )
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1804909.jKZMGoeAWa"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 68
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:7400


--nextPart1804909.jKZMGoeAWa
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Thursday, October 01, 2015 02:11:29 PM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 01, 2015, at 07:47 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> >I am a bit worried that the team is handled behind closed walls.
> 
> I have no particular interest in either grabbing power nor in taking power
> away from anybody, but I think there may be some value in making team
> governance more transparent and democratic.  Two reasons come to mind:
> 
> No one person has to take the heat for uncomfortable decisions.  At some
> point decisions have to be made for the good of the team, whether they're
> technical or social.  What might be difficult for one person to decide can
> be made easier when the burden of that decision can be shared among duly
> elected representatives.
> 
> Team members can have more of a say --and more confidence in-- how the team
> is run.  If you elect someone to a leadership role, you're giving your
> support to them to make the tough decisions.  And you have the option of
> voting them out at the next election.
> 
> I don't think any of that's controversial, given that the Debian project
> itself is both transparent and democratic, and we always have those
> governance rules to fall back on.  But that's a pretty heavyweight
> bureaucracy.
> 
> Does it make sense to have some lightweight rules for the team?  Is there
> precedence within other Debian teams?

I've been a team member since, I think, 2008.  This is the first time we've had 
anything like this come up that I recall.  I don't think we have a problem 
with team members not having enough say as a general rule.

For the git migration, the people taking the time to do the work or pay 
attention to the work and provide feedback are driving what happens when.  
There's nothing that being a team administrator has to do with it.

With the exception of the DPL, Debian is not democratic.  It's doacratic.  
Let's not mess with that.

Scott K
--nextPart1804909.jKZMGoeAWa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=hAW+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1804909.jKZMGoeAWa--