Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 18:04, Graham Wilson a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > If aj's stops beeing a member of dunc-tank, and do not works > > publicily for that dunc-tank, then I remove my second here, he can > > stay as DPL. If he prefers dunc-tank, and work for it, he must not > > be a delegate anymore, and especialy not DPL. > > Is this a suitable compromise? Are there enough people upset with > dunc-tank to even try to reach a compromise on the issue?
there is IMHO two distinct issues with dunc-tank: (1) the conflict of interests that motivated my second ; (2) the idea of the project itself. I do not agree with dunc-tank, but there is nothing that I can do against it, as it has been on purpose kept away from the project, so the debate about dunc-tank does not belong here, on -vote. And there is the problem that delegates that can take decisions in debian are involved in dunc-tank. If Aj decide not to be involved in dunk-tank anymore, then the problem (1) disappears. Only remains (2), but (2) has not to be solved or discussed through a recall procedure, that would be a blatant ad-hominem attack, while in my mind it's not. I'd say that I'm not more comfortable with Steve McIntyre beeing involved and a DPL-assistant (or whatever name his position has) either, so if Aj stops beeing involved with dunc-tank, (1) is in fact half solved. I obviously only speak for myself. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O [EMAIL PROTECTED] OOO http://www.madism.org
pgp0ci9e7zF3P.pgp
Description: PGP signature
