Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.vote > #1871 > unrolled thread

Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.vote

Contents

  Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2021-03-19 10:40 +0100
    Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Sruthi Chandran <srud@disroot.org> - 2021-03-19 19:50 +0100
      Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Christian Kastner <ckk@debian.org> - 2021-03-19 23:30 +0100
    Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2021-03-19 20:20 +0100
      Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2021-03-19 23:20 +0100
    Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> - 2021-03-19 23:30 +0100
      Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2021-03-21 01:40 +0100
        Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Thomas Hochstein <thh@thh.name> - 2021-03-22 23:30 +0100
    Re: Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL? Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx@debian.org> - 2021-03-22 21:40 +0100

#1871 — Should the project hire one or two persons to help the DPL?

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello,

as a followup to my former question that dressed a negative picture
of the DPL role in the last years, I'd like to make a proposal and
see what you all think of it.

There are quite a few software projects that have hired staff to help
smooth the internal working of organizations, I know at least of Django
with its fellowship program:
https://www.djangoproject.com/fundraising/#fellowship-program

The current resources of Debian means that we can confidently hire at least
one or two fellows that would work under the direction of the DPL
and not be in troubles for many years.

IMO this would go a long way to fix the current problems of the DPL role:

* it means that the DPL can organize the administrative work so that
  it ends up on the shoulders of paid staff, and the DPL can take a more
  active role in leading

* it means that the DPL can direct workforce in areas where they believe
  work is needed (like good documentation for beginners, like coordinating
  with a contractor to have a good introductory video or better looking
  website, like finding useful projects to submit for funding to Freexian
  ;-))

* and due to the former point, I expect we would have more candidates in
  the future

I'm sure there are also downsides to hiring staff, but at some point,
if we want to make the DPL job enjoyable and interesting for most of us,
we need to do something about it.

To the DPL candidates, if you are elected, will you consider this idea?

To the other DD, would you second a GR to allow the DPL to hire one
or two persons to help him lead the project? What kind of safeguards would
be needed?

Cheesr,
-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   Raphaël Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋    The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
  ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1882

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 19/03/21 3:08 pm, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
>
> as a followup to my former question that dressed a negative picture
> of the DPL role in the last years, I'd like to make a proposal and
> see what you all think of it.
>
> There are quite a few software projects that have hired staff to help
> smooth the internal working of organizations, I know at least of Django
> with its fellowship program:
> https://www.djangoproject.com/fundraising/#fellowship-program
>
> The current resources of Debian means that we can confidently hire at least
> one or two fellows that would work under the direction of the DPL
> and not be in troubles for many years.
>
> IMO this would go a long way to fix the current problems of the DPL role:
>
> * it means that the DPL can organize the administrative work so that
>   it ends up on the shoulders of paid staff, and the DPL can take a more
>   active role in leading
>
> * it means that the DPL can direct workforce in areas where they believe
>   work is needed (like good documentation for beginners, like coordinating
>   with a contractor to have a good introductory video or better looking
>   website, like finding useful projects to submit for funding to Freexian
>   ;-))
>
> * and due to the former point, I expect we would have more candidates in
>   the future
>
> I'm sure there are also downsides to hiring staff, but at some point,
> if we want to make the DPL job enjoyable and interesting for most of us,
> we need to do something about it.
>
> To the DPL candidates, if you are elected, will you consider this idea?

I do not think this is a good idea. This again brings back to the
rehashed argument whether Debian should pay some people and let others
work as volunteers. Paying even a couple of people will discourage
others. The complete volunteer nature of Debian is one of the important
and attractive point that makes Debian different from other distros.

I have a different suggestion. We can create a couple of delegated
administrative roles who can help DPL function smoothly. (I think
something similar was experimented with delegating a 2nd In-Command. I
have just heard about it,  do not know the history of how that worked
out, was it successful etc.). If I am elected, I will definitely
consider delegating a couple of people to assist me.

> To the other DD, would you second a GR to allow the DPL to hire one
> or two persons to help him lead the project? What kind of safeguards would
> be needed?
>
> Cheesr,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1892

On 19.03.21 19:47, Sruthi Chandran wrote:
> The complete volunteer nature of Debian is one of the important
> and attractive point that makes Debian different from other distros.

The complete volunteer nature also means that certain tasks/chores get
done slowly, or sometimes not at all.

For example, I don't think LTS support would be what it is without
Freexian funding. The funding makes it a win-win for both users and
developers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1887

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

You asked if DDs would support the DPL hiring people.
So I answer as an DD.

>>>>> "Raphael" == Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> writes:

    Raphael> * it means that the DPL can organize the administrative
    Raphael> work so that it ends up on the shoulders of paid staff, and
    Raphael> the DPL can take a more active role in leading

I think spending money on accounting, legal, and other administrative
functions sounds great.
I don't have a problem paying people to do this or paying organizations
to do this.
We already pay TOs (to do work for Debian (our larger TO takes a percentage of
donations); we already pay lawyers; some TOs pay accountants.
I see no problem with Debian spending more money directly if it benefits
us in this regard.

There was discussion last year of a Debian foundation.
I think there are lots of issue to work through there, but I think there
is good that can come of that proposal.


    Raphael> * it means that the DPL can direct workforce in areas where
    Raphael> they believe work is needed (like good documentation for
    Raphael> beginners, like coordinating with a contractor to have a
    Raphael> good introductory video or better looking website, like
    Raphael> finding useful projects to submit for funding to Freexian
    Raphael> ;-))

Um, no.
Money is power.
The DPL should help the project achieve its goals.
The DPL should not  use the project's money to achieve their own
personal agenda.
Having the DPL unilaterally spend someone's time on documentation,
videos, etc would really mess up our power balance.

That said, some of those functions are distant enough from developing an
OS, I'd support a delegated team asking for money to hire someone.  As a
specific example, if we had a team that wanted money to produce a
introductory video I'd support that.
In my mind the distance from the DPL would be key in making that
appropriate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1891

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

thanks for your answer!

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Um, no.
> Money is power.
> The DPL should help the project achieve its goals.
> The DPL should not  use the project's money to achieve their own
> personal agenda.

I would like to respond two things:

1/ The DPL would not use the money directly, it would use the time of
one or two persons that that the project at large agreed to make available
to the DPL. Hence my question of whether there would be DD willing to
second a GR allowing the project to spend money to pay persons whose
mission would be decided by the DPL.

2/ In my eyes, that's also why we run elections, so that the personal
agenda of motivated persons can become the project's agenda to some
degree.

If the work of DPL is only to help others achieve their goal, then
I don't see us being able to convince many more persons to candidate
for the role. And the specific set ok skills required to be successful
in such a role is very different from the set of skills that we usually
have as project members.

Cheers,
-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   Raphaël Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋    The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
  ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1893

On 16077 March 1977, Raphael Hertzog wrote:

> There are quite a few software projects that have hired staff to help
> smooth the internal working of organizations, I know at least of 
> Django
> with its fellowship program:
> https://www.djangoproject.com/fundraising/#fellowship-program

> The current resources of Debian means that we can confidently hire at 
> least
> one or two fellows that would work under the direction of the DPL
> and not be in troubles for many years.

Leaving out the detail of Debian paying someone for work, this has one 
more thing that can backfire hard, as I just could witness in an 
(entirely unrelated) org: That those hired ones got more powerful than 
the actual leader. Simply by being there continuously, doing ground 
work, that the actual leader(s) over time didn't want to do. With time a 
big bunch of the work just got done, mostly leaving the radar of the 
leader then, and so they ended up controlling much, the leader being a 
figurehead in the end.

There sure are ways to work against this, but for the first few leaders 
it was just comfortable, and then on and on the next ones got less 
interested in that particular work, and it all went down. And it 
appearently is quite hard to get back in control, even if you want to, 
if you have the whole admin setup working against you, as they want to 
keep what they have.

-- 
bye, Joerg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1896

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 23:20:58 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:

> Leaving out the detail of Debian paying someone for work, this has one more
> thing that can backfire hard, as I just could witness in an (entirely
> unrelated) org: That those hired ones got more powerful than the actual
> leader. Simply by being there continuously, doing ground work, that the
> actual leader(s) over time didn't want to do. With time a big bunch of the
> work just got done, mostly leaving the radar of the leader then, and so they
> ended up controlling much, the leader being a figurehead in the end.

I'd like to echo what Ganneff is saying.

I also know from personal experience in (non-software) volunteer
organizations, and a friend of mine has written her diploma thesis on
this topic researching yet another NGO, that a setup with a volunteer
board/committee/chairperson/president and employed
executives/secretaries is difficult, as the latters are the one
spending more time, collecting more information, becoming the
information centre, … over time, and hereby either become the de
facto power centre or at least causing struggles or fights over who
actually controls the whole thing.

This is not to say that I would dismiss the idea of having paid
employees in a volunteer organization completely; like Sam wrote, I
think paying for work that doesn't get done otherwise and (my
addition) that is not a core activity of the organization -- e.g.
accounting -- can make sense. But I'd like to stress that the whole
construction needs careful thought in order to prevent unintended
side effects as far as possible.


Cheers,
gregor 

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Bettina Wegner: Jesus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1912

gregor herrmann schrieb:

> I also know from personal experience in (non-software) volunteer
> organizations, and a friend of mine has written her diploma thesis on
> this topic researching yet another NGO, that a setup with a volunteer
> board/committee/chairperson/president and employed
> executives/secretaries is difficult, as the latters are the one
> spending more time, collecting more information, becoming the
> information centre, … over time, and hereby either become the de
> facto power centre or at least causing struggles or fights over who
> actually controls the whole thing.

Perhaps that could be avoided by limiting the term of employed staff;
not necessarily to just one year, but to two, three or four years.

-thh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1908

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le vendredi, 19 mars 2021, 10.38:08 h CET Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> There are quite a few software projects that have hired staff to help
> smooth the internal working of organizations, I know at least of Django
> with its fellowship program:
> https://www.djangoproject.com/fundraising/#fellowship-program
> 
> The current resources of Debian means that we can confidently hire at least
> one or two fellows that would work under the direction of the DPL
> and not be in troubles for many years.

Thank you for bringing this topic on the table, I consider it very important 
for the long-term sustainability of the project!

> To the other DD, would you second a GR to allow the DPL to hire one
> or two persons to help him lead the project? What kind of safeguards would
> be needed?

Yes, definitely. (tl; dr: in fact it turns out I rather disagree)

But I liked last year's focus put by Brian about this idea; I don't see the 
whole solution being only "having staff on a payroll", but it's rather a 
larger structural question.

So, to take a (hopefully small) step back, for me the question we shall ask 
ourselves is: what organizational structure, with what roles accountable for 
which areas of responsibility, with what material support or financial 
compensation is best suited to serve our larger organization's purpose and 
long- (and mid-)term goals?

Our constitution has established a "large body of peers, with one elected 
leader delegating power, no financial compensations" structure, which I think 
served us moderately well until some years ago, but not sufficiently well 
anymore.

From other non-IT/non-Debian experience, I have also witnessed (in my very 
privileged socio-cultural environment, so take that with a grain of salt) that 
the way people spend their volunteer time has also evolved quite a lot in the 
past 10 years: people don't engage in their communities the same way they did 
a decade ago. They don't necessarily spend less time overall, but it's much 
more cluttered, spread among more organizations, causes and concerns. And 
volunteers have different expectations in terms of recognition, of 
compensation, and of commitment. Applying this to our organization, I feel 
that volunteering to be the DPL for a year doesn't have the same meaning as it 
had 10 years ago; the responsibilites, exposure and expected commitment have 
changed, but the "job description" hasn't.

Now, notwithstanding the discussion about making Debian a legal entity world-
wide, I think it's about time for Debian to adopt a "more than just one 
perfect elected individual" leadership structure (I'm well aware it took all 
sorts of names over the years, ranging from DPL Board to DPL advisory 
committee, etc etc). It's really not uncommon for organizations to have 
Boards, with only elected roles, and that's the direction I'd lean into; we 
need a larger body of elected roles to take on the set of tasks currently 
given to the DPL (probably a larger one too). So I think we need to start 
talking concretely about the number of roles, their purpose and 
accountabilities, their names, the length of their mandates, etc etc. THEN, 
with such a body in place, with elected roles filled by volunteers, I think we 
can start talking about hiring.

(OK, that turned out to be a larger step back than I expected, sorry).

If, and when, Debian (likely through the DPL, or directly) opens a paid 
position for a specific role, we need to be abundantly clear about the job 
description, the limits of the role, the reporting expectations, etc etc. I 
would definitely not "allow the DPL to hire to help them lead the project", 
but I would rather "allow the DPL to hire somebody to fill a specific 
(eventually wide) non-leadership support role". In other terms; I don't think 
we want to have paid staff with actual decision powers. I do think we might 
agree to having paid staff *without* actual decision power, but providing 
administrative support for example.

Regarding Ganneff and gregoa's concerns (which I share to some extent); I know 
of many non-IT organizations which have these types of structures, and it 
works usually quite well, because the formal decision powers reside in elected 
volunteers, while loads of administrative, directed, support work is done by 
paid staff. Of course, paid staff ends up spending quite some more time on 
some topics, and gain deeper knowledge, reputation, and can end up 
overshadowing the elected volunteers who can't manage / afford to dive as deep 
in some subjects; so that's exactly why we ought to define the paid staff's 
mandate precisely, with these caveats in mind.

Anyway; in short; I think a project the size of Debian needs reliable and  
accessible administrative support paid staff, to free the leadership (and lots 
of non-leadership) roles from this burden, and to help all volunteers focus on 
what they do best instead of being drowned in administrativia and accounting 
loopholes.

-- 
    OdyX

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.vote

csiph-web