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

Groups > linux.debian.devel > #117148

Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?)

From "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.debian.devel
Subject Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?)
Date 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
Message-ID <KK573-1zgp-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <KJQhH-1pv7-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <KK0K5-1ws9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <KK3yh-1ylY-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <KK4kF-1yEt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <KK4E1-1z44-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

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

[follow-ups should probably go to -project; this issue is non-technical]

Hi Andreas,

Thank you for your prompt follow-up.

At 2025-05-08T10:14:57+0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Am Thu, May 08, 2025 at 02:54:47AM -0500 schrieb G. Branden Robinson:
> > At 2025-05-08T09:07:48+0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > I don't believe the DPL should initiate GRs. I also think that when
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > this GR does happen (and I'm confident it will), someone else will be
> > > DPL.
> > 
> > In future DPL campaigns, I encourage the electorate to insist that each
> > candidate disclose which powers of the office they categorically refuse
>                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > to exercise.
> 
> I think your paraphrasing of my statement is wrong.

I don't; your clarification reinforces my interpretation.

> Explanation for my initial statement: This reflects a personal
> judgment, not an absolute rule.

A rule doesn't have to be absolute to be general--in other words,
categorical.  Moreover, one way to interpret accession to the office of
DPL through election is that the event reflects a general expression by
the developers of trust in the winning candidate to exercise one's
personal judgment wisely.

That's good for you, and potentially good for the Project.  But we
should also have a clear idea of what we can expect of our candidates in
terms of the exercise of the constitutional powers of the office.

Would you be more comfortable with me characterizing your position as,
"I intend not to exercise the DPL power of initiating a GR except as an
emergency measure, have not observed any qualifying emergency in
Debian's history, and do not foresee one arising during my term."?

If not, I am eager and intensely curious to hear of the exceptional
circumstances you've contemplated.

> My reasoning is that the DPL's formal position might unduly influence
> the outcome of a GR, and I prefer to avoid that potential imbalance. I
> aim to treat all Debian Developers equally and therefore choose to
> refrain from initiating GRs--not because I believe it's categorically
> wrong, but because I think it's the more impartial course of action in
> my own case.

You did not say, and have made clear that you did not mean to say
merely, "I don't believe I should initiate a GR with respect to
inaugurating an ITN policy at this time."

Also, I said nothing about categorical "wrongness".  The assessment of
trustworthy judgment in the exercise of authorized powers is a separate
matter and adequately expressed by Debian's electoral process, IMO.

Your position is a defensible one in terms of it being a conscionable
leadership style.  And I grant that it may be one that a majority of the
electorate will expect from DPLs for the indefinite future.

But I continue to think that we should get our leader candidates on the
record in this respect in all future elections.

My personal opinion is that the DPL should use all of the tools the
Debian Constitution makes available to them to address problems that
have to date resisted resolution.

Thanks again for clarifying.

Regards,
Branden

Back to linux.debian.devel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-07 09:40 +0200
  Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 17:20 +0200
    Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 17:50 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-07 19:00 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 20:00 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 23:30 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx> - 2025-05-08 06:10 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 08:20 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 08:50 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-08 09:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 09:10 +0200
            Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:00 +0200
              Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:20 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:40 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-07 21:20 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 22:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 00:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 02:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 04:40 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 12:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 11:20 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-08 17:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 20:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 20:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 22:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 06:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 09:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 11:30 +0200
                RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 12:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-09 13:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 22:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 23:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 01:00 +0200
                git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 09:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Richard Lewis <richard.lewis.debian@googlemail.com> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 13:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-12 13:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 14:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 10:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> - 2025-05-14 11:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Ananthu C V <weepingclown@disroot.org> - 2025-05-14 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Peter B <peter@pblackman.plus.com> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 13:50 +0200
                debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 14:30 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 21:00 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-18 22:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-21 14:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-26 13:20 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-26 13:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 11:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 12:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2025-05-17 01:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> - 2025-05-12 10:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <josch@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 16:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-13 18:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 15:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 20:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-16 16:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-18 16:20 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-11 23:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 09:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 10:30 +0200
              Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 14:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 15:40 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 18:00 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-08 18:50 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 21:10 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 21:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-09 19:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 19:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-13 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 13:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 13:50 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 14:00 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 22:50 +0200

csiph-web