On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:27:15 +0100, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:36:28 +0930
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> - i
>> dont expect you to leave the ground when a user says 'jump'. but if
>> the only user whos allowed to say jump is a DD, then therse a
>> problem.
> Users have ways of requesting that things get done in Debian - the
> BTS, the mailing lists and IRC but users cannot dictate how those
> things are actually achieved. If the DD agrees, fine - if not, the DD
> makes the call.
> Only other DD's can stipulate *how* things actually get done and not
> just because only DD's can actually change Policy.
> There's no problem with that.
> Users can ask but DD's are not obliged to act on the suggestion in the
> way that the user requests. A suggestion from a fellow DD carries more
> weight but even then, unless there is a stipulation in Policy, a
> suggestion from a DD is still a suggestion. Equally, DD's who appear
> to ignore users would eventually find that other DD's find a solution
> to the problem(s) raised by the user(s) via an NMU, co-maintenance,
> etc.
If I may ad a rider to this: consider what kinds of things we
vote upon: we try not to vote on technical issues, since voting is a
poor means of making technical decisions. Most votes are about
governance issues for Debian, or on internal policies and procedures;
and this is not really something people outside the organization get to
have a say in. Most countries do not give franchise to just anyone,
unless a certain degree of commitment, and affirmation of belonging
happen first.
Consider the votes held in the last couple of year:
1 General Resolution: Why the GNU Free Documentation License is not
suitable for Debian main
2 Debian Project Leader Elections 2006
3 Constitutional Amendment General Resolution: Handling assets for the
project
4 General Resolution: Position statement clarifying DFSG #2
5 General Resolution: Recall the project leader
6 General Resolution: Re-affirm support to the Debian Project Leader
7 General Resolution: Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel
8 Debian Project Leader Elections 2007
9 General Resolution: Altering package upload rules
10 General Resolution: Endorse the concept of Debian Maintainers
Votes #2 and #8 are about electing the project leader; the
titular head of the project, and one who can make decisions which may
impact every developer; the public face of the project, etc. I am not
sure very many people would see the benefit of letting users say who
leads the project. Votes #5 and #6 also belong to the category of the
project leader.
Votes #3 changes a foundation document in Debian; I think that
people who have not affirmed their commitment to Debian ought not to
get a say anyway. Vote #1, #4, and #7 are about clarifying bits of a
foundation document (the DFSG), and related issues. Again, not
something that the end user needs to have a say in.
Vote #9 and #10 are about internal procedures of the Debian
project, I am not sure I see the argument for opening the decision
process to the wide world.
manoj
in a meeting, bored
--
Try to have as good a life as you can under the circumstances.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
