Hi Russ, * Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> [2021-10-05 21:16]:
I'm somewhat surprised that there has been no discussion of the timing of the GR discussion period, which I expected to be more controversial. The scheme I'm proposing is relatively complex but allows the discussion period to vary from 1 week to 4 weeks based on how much ballot option activity there is and based on DPL actions. If anyone is unhappy with that (if, for example, you think it's too complex or 4 weeks is too short or too long), now would be a good time to bring that up so that we can discuss it.
Thank you very much for the reminder, and allow me to add my two cents:
The Debian Constitution, like most good constitutions, has this nice power hierarchy: at the lower end of the spectrum, a single maintainer can act quickly as they see fit, but with limited scope and subject to the Constitution and the Policy. (The DPL is not unlike a maintainer for the debian-project package in this regard). At the upper end, the assembly of all developers has basically unlimited powers via GR, but requires exensive deliberations and a certain amount of time to decide. The Tech-CTTE is somewhere in the middle. In a sense, the GR is the Ultimate Weapon for large-scale decisions beyond the scope of a single maintainer, a group of maintainers, or any other constitutional entity. As such, I regard a certain cumbersomeness as a feature, not a bug. I believe it is more important to have a well-understood, very predictable process that ensures all voices are heard, even if it sacrifices flexibility. We already have the DPL and other delegated teams to deal with more urgent issues. I'd prefer a fixed N week discussion period for some reasonable N over any scheme that depends on DD oder DPL actions and may easily become subject to rule gaming. At the most, I would add a provision to extend the discussion period under certain circumstances if N is relatively small. This way, any DD can anticipate the voting period well in advance and adjust their personal schedule accordingly to make sure they can vote if the issue is important to them. And if we identify any topic that requires more urgent decisions on a regular basis, I think the GR should not become a micro management tool but delegate the necessary power the DPL or some other entity. Cheers Timo -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ │ Timo Röhling │ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1 23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │ ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
