On 12/11/14 17:47, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 11/12/2014 07:08 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote: >> On 12/11/14 11:43, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:04:05AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: >>>> It is very sad to see that contributors sometimes feel that the only >>>> option for them is to resign. >>>> >>>> Would it be worthwhile giving people another option, for example, >>>> allowing a percentage of DDs to formally veto decisions? Would this be >>>> better than people leaving outright? >>> Can you elaborate which decisions and how many DDs could veto them? >>> >> >> I didn't want to be too specific, to give other people a chance to make >> suggestions >> >> However, one possibility is that anybody maintaining an essential >> package and anybody who is a DPL delegate would be able to veto. The >> implication is that somebody can still win a GR against the veto, but >> they do so knowing that they will have to find somebody else to maintain >> some essential packages. > > I don't agree with filtering the people on what kind of package they > maintain, or if they have a role delegated by the DPL. This makes > absolutely no sense to me: in what way are they more competent, and why > should they have more power than others?
It is not a suggestion that such people are more or less competent than anybody else. Rather, it is a recognition of the fact that if these people are going to leave anyway (or are not going to lift a finger to support a particular decision, as everybody is a volunteer after all) then people proposing the decision need to actively demonstrate that they can take on the extra workload that will result from getting a decision in their favor. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54639613.1010...@pocock.pro
