Although I take exception to some of the name calling that has been done against Charles and Lucas, I am fine with switching to this alternative proposal as its ultimate intend is identical: to safeguard that no changes are made to something as fundamental to the project as its membership procedures without proper discussion of alternatives within the whole project and only implementing those changes after getting concensus or a vote.
IMO Charles quite rightly saw a risk in the way Joerg presented his original proposal and there was absolutely insufficient clarification from anybody involved in its drafting to take away that unrest, thus making a holding action necessary. Charles chose the proper procedure for that holding action, though possibly the wording was indeed a bit too cold. I personally have no doubt that both Charles and Lucas do appreciate the work done by Joerg and others. I know I do as having something concrete to start from is an excellent way to start of a much needed reform process. I do hope that in future people will refrain from posting invasive proposals to d-d-a, especially without a very clear marcation that it's an RFC, a DRAFT, a basis for discussion. Joerg's mail looked way too much as "this is what we've decided, you can comment on it but we intend to start implementing it soonish". The risk was that after an intensive discussion, we'd have found ourselves in the situation where DAM would say "oh, that's very nice, but in the mean time we've implemented the new procedure and as NM is happy with it too, we'll just start using it". I'm *not* saying that is what would have happened, but the mail to d-d-a very much had that feel about it. And after that introduction: I hereby second the proposal quoted below and have no objection to Charles Plessy's earlier proposal being dropped (or retracted). | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are not | working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not provided by | the project with as much help as might be possible, useful or required, nor | opportunities to join the project. | | We thank Joerg Jaspert for exploring ideas on how to involve contributors more | closely with and within the project so that they can get both recognition and | the necessary tools to do their work. | | We realize that the proposal posted to the debian-devel-announce mailinglist is | not yet finalized and may not have the support of a large part of our | community. We invite the DAM and all the contributors to further develop their | ideas in close coordination with other members of the project, and to present a | new and improved proposal on the project's mailinglists in the future. | | Significant changes should only be implemented after consensus within | the project at large has been reached, or when decided by a general | resolution.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
