Re: What is going on here?

["Brian C. White" <bcwhite@verisim.com>]

> I fear that Debian get's a monarchy and we all have to say "yes, Sir"
> or quit the project.  In former times there were discussion on
> important things.  This time, I see _very_ important changes where the
> project leader only says that "xyz is done this way, now go on folks".

I fear that you're mistaken.  In fact, Bruce has taken a lot of
heat lately where people disagreed with his ideas.


> * I didn't see any discussion on the BoD?

Discussion on the BoD has been ongoing since early December.


>   Bruce said:
> 
>   "The four members who have the most votes will be elected to
>   two-year terms"
> 
>   Why shall they be elected for two-year terms? Two years is a long
>   time?  Many of us can't promise that they'll be here after one
>   year.  Look at Ian Jackson who has done much of work in the past.
>   At the moment he can't afford working for debian, just reading and
>   answering some mails.

Two years _is_ a long time for something such as this, but one year
is pretty short for someone to have a useful impact.  In addition,
if we want to turnover half the board at each election (which I
personally think is a good idea), then we'd be having elections
every six months.  Not only would this be a lot of overhead, it
would give an "unstable" impression of the project as a whole.


>   "Developers are those who are currently maintaining at least one
>   package."
> 
>   Hey folks, this is not fair!!! We have several people who work for
>   Debian but do not maintain _any_ package.  What's about them?  For
>   example: most of the m68k people don't maintain any package, but
>   they really work for Debian, on the m68k port.  There are also
>   several people that take a look at some packages and work on ways to
>   control them (--> admintool story).  I heavily object against this.
> 
>   Remember developer != package maintainer.

Life isn't fair.  There are always exceptions, but no matter how
hard you try to include those exceptions, you can't please everybody.
The best place to draw the line is usually the cleanest, most obvious
place.  The less "creative interpretation" than can be done, the
better.

Now, in this case, modifying the line a bit to include package builders
for other architectures is not difficult.  Neither would it be to
include people who maintain the "debian.org" machines and the like.
But, there are several people I know who are very knowledgeable about
Debian and yet are not developers.  The only clean way to include them
would be to open it up to everyone.  Doing such is not a bad idea,
but it's getting awefully close to the wire to have lengthy discussions
on such things.  In additon, this mechanism can change in the future.


>   "Debian should continue to be run by the developers. The purpose of
>   the board is to provide a stable framework to support election of
>   officers and business functions, and to provide broad direction on
>   policy in response to input from the developers. Officers should
>   make day-to-day policy decisions."
> 
>   What is this about?  Hey folks, we even don't know what we want but
>   there will be an election of who get's power do decide major stuff.
>   I cannot believe this.

This is precisely the point!  With several hundred people making the
decision, the decisions never get made.  Everybody has a complaint and
there is no unified front to protect the people who implement the
"consensus".  Anybody who acts gets hung out to dry should the tides
change.


> * The CD Issue
> 
>   I didn't see a discussion with the result of a decision.  After some
>   maintainer have objected, Bruce _decided_ something.  Why?  And why
>   in that short time?

Again, this is part of the role the BoD is supposed to take care of.  At
the moment, Bruce is the project leader and made, to the best of his
ability, a decision in which he honestly felt would help the project
as a whole.  This is his right.  He has the responsibility and thus must
have the authority.  Some people disagreed and, unfortunately, those were
the only people to speak up at the time.

Whether Bruce was right to change his opinion or should have stuck to
his guns is not a topic I think is worthy of investigation given the
fact that it won't change anything in the past and the upcoming elections
will change how such decisions are made in the future.


>   Are developer nothing worth but maintaining their packages and be
>   quiet?  If so I'll be the first one quitting the project.  This
>   doesn't help us producing a perfect distribution.

If you think that the BoD members will simply unsubscribe from debian-*
and pass down their decisions, then I think you have sorely misjudged
and insulted the people who are running.
                                             
                                          Brian
                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )
                                             
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're not.


--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com