-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Good questions. Here are some fairly quick answers.
* What do you think are the three big things Debian should achieve over the next twelve months? The obvious one is to get woody released. * What do you think will be the three major problems Debian will face over the next year or two? The bandwidth consumed by our current distribution methods, the sheer number of packages in the distribution, and the administrative effort required to keep the project running. * Debian has had four DPLs so far: Ian Murdock, Bruce Perens, Ian Jackson, and Wichert Akkerman. What do you think each of these DPLs did right, and are there any examples of things you would do differently in their place (with or without the benefit of hindsight)? Ian Murdock got us started, and set the tone for what was to follow. Bruce Perens put us on the map, as the catalyst who brought together things like the Social Contract that we now consider fundamental, and by making big improvements in our installation process of the time. Ian Jackson led us through the process of setting up the rules that have kept us functional as we've grown dramatically. It's too soon for me to know what we will thank Wichert for the most in the future... I'm glad the NM process got reworked during his watch, and I think he's done a good job of representing the project publicly. * The DPL is a fairly loosely defined position, so the successful candidate can probably use that position to provide leadership in a fair few areas. Bruce seemed particularly successful at publicising Debian, and Ian Jackson did a fair bit of stuff getting Debian set up procedurally. If elected, what sort of areas would you see yourself focussing on: technical, political, procedural, publicity, or something else? How would you see the areas you don't have the time or ability to handle being dealt with? I'd like to spend my time on a mix of technical and relationship/advocacy work. Successful delegation is the only way to get the rest done in a large organization. * Debian is becoming increasingly appropriate for commercial purposes: whether as a server in a place of business, or as a base for a derived distribution, or as a base on which to run proprietry software. What sort of things should we be doing to make Debian more suitable for these uses, for example, having someone people can call and tell their credit card number to, in case their server goes down and they need it back up right now, or making our non-free archive more readily available for people distributing no-cost (or trial-only) proprietry software (such as jdk 1.2, perhaps)? I alluded to this in my initial platform posting. Of the various areas mentioned here, the thing I'd most like to see happen are derivative and/or subset distributions. It would be neat (and I think natural) to see more of the systems shipping pre-loaded with Linux shipping pre-loaded with proper subsets of Debian. I do not want to see non-free more readily available, I would in fact like for it to wither and die. That's not contrary to the needs of commercial interests, since anyone can create a distribution site and offer up sources.list entries to our/their users. The support thing can and should happen, but it's not clear to me what role Debian per se can or should have there. * Debian currently has a reasonable amount of cash thanks to both donations and awards. What should we be doing with it? I'm pleased to see most of it earn interest for now. If we identify specific needs, we shouldn't be afraid to spend some of it, but building a war chest for the future is not a bad plan. I'm open to good ideas. * Do you still use proprietry, non-free, or unpackaged software (or anything else not distributed by Debian) for anything? Yes. If so, what, and is anything being done to remedy this unacceptable situation? I use computers for a lot of different kinds of tasks. While the vast majority of my time is spent on Debian systems, I'm not ashamed to use commercial software when there is no suitable Open Source solution. The highest-profile examples at home are Quicken and Turbotax for my complex personal finances, Cadsoft's Eagle for schematic capture and PC board layout (this runs on Linux, at least!), and a diverse mix of free and non-free development tools for my amateur radio and amateur satellite projects. I mentioned vrms in a previous note. One of the things I think is important is *knowing* when you're using Free Software and when you aren't. I have no problem using non-free software when there's no reasonable alternative, but I want to routinely be re-asking the question and adopting free alternatives as they become viable. * What do you think about the social environment of Debian? For instance, we tend to have a different flamewar every week; is this a demonstration of our firey passion for what we're doing, or that we're about to crash and burn? Should we be doing anything in particular to change the demographics of our membership; perhaps trying to increase the number of female developers, or documenters, or artists, or at least to make it easier for such people to contribute? If so, what? Are developers too removed from the userbase (with separate mailing lists and IRC channels), or is the mix still pretty good? As I indicated in my platform posting, I think Debian's social environment could stand a little maturity, or at least the illusion of it. We need to remember that everyone here is a volunteer. Many of us are passionate about what we do, and about Debian overall. Ours is an amazing community, tightly knit in some ways despite the fact that most of us couldn't pick each other out of a police line-up. The depth and honesty of emotions when something tragic happens to one of us is a good measure of just how much we care about each other. We might be more attractive to non-technical contributors if our mailing lists and IRC channels were less "aggressive"... but it will only make a difference if we're honestly treating each other with more respect while remaining passionate about what we're working on. * what release of Debian will come standard with IPv6 support? Heck if I know. If elected DPL, one of the aspects of leadership I've thought about exploring is the process by which we set goals for the project. However, from where I sit, the industry at large has seemed pretty wishy-washy about IPv6. If the developers who are interested in IPv6 have a goal in mind that a little attention from the DPL and/or release manager(s) could help to be achieved... I'd be open to talking about it and seeing what makes sense. One of the key things to remember about Debian, though, is that efforts like this mostly need to happen bottoms-up. Bdale -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6o17BZKfAp/LPAagRAlA0AKCAUSsP73537eXAFYMdwSEuptOmSwCeK1+E 1wJNQ/mN+h3KDSMriZpfBk4= =P7/k -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
