Re: Call for vote: Impeachment of the president [was: Re: new maintainers]

[Dominik Kubla <dominik.kubla@uni-mainz.de>]

>>>>> Dale Scheetz writes:

>> 1. Who entitled you to shift the basic policy of the project?

> Determining a method for validating new maintainers has been
> discussed, off and on for some time now. The above stated position
> and problems are not a "shift" in policy as much as an attempt to
> implement some.

There was discussion, right but he said he had started to turn
developers away because the just wanted to package a game.  That there
has to be a distinction of developers based on what they package has
never been proposed and i say he overstep the boundaries of his office
and is way out of line.

> The board is currently charged with "determining a framework for
> decision making" in the form of a corporation that can act as an
> umbrella under which the Debian Development Project can operate. The
> board may be empowered by this framework to make policy decisions,
> however, I would hope that that framework includes the membership
> at-large in the decision making process. Currently the board has
> given this power to Bruce when it pertains to the day to day
> operation of the project.

Which he said he has turned over to Dan Quinlan.  All this shifting of
power is doing nothing but setting up smoke screens.  Who is
responsible for what? And where does their responsibility end?  I am
sick of this.

> Bruce has already exercised his powers in appointing someone to
> orphaned packages and new maintainers (the idea being that new
> maintainers should be encouraged to take over orphaned packages
> before adding new packages, so that they can become properly
> educated in the production of packages).  This seems to be exactly
> the job you want Bruce to perform.

Ah, so he has?  When did he and whom did he appoint?  I have the
impression that there is a lot going on of which the developers and
the Debian community as a whole are not kept aware of.  What happend
to the claim that Debian should be distribution "by users for users"?

> I think that this is a perception problem on your part Dominik. No
> one, not even Bruce has ever argued for a "closed team".

No has not, but matter of factly he is implementing one.  All those
talk about verifing developers was so far just talk with no consensus
if and what action had to be taken.

> Personally, I would prefer to hear just what, about the proposal,
> you dislike so much, rather than this disruptive (and to my mind
> uncalled for) call for a "vote of dismissal from office".  Anger is
> not an appropriate motivational tool to use when you become
> frustrated. At least in groups like this it only escalates tensions.

I dislike that he acted before he informed. He is creating facts and
then leaves us no chance but to follow his lead, even when it is not
necessary that he uses this approach.

> Well, there do seem to be some distribution problems with the
> lists. There are "top people" working on it as we speak. This "last
> action" as you put it was completely sanctioned by the board and, to
> my mind, has been positive in many respects. If you want Bruce's
> removal because of this class of action on his part, you better just
> shoot the whole board as well.

Say again! The board approved that he deleted all the lists?  You got
to be joking.

> Dominik, please, it is apparent from your posting that your are
> angry and frustrated, but this aggressive posture you have taken is
> no good for anyone (yourself included). Please consider the goals
> and motivations that drive your participation in the group. Then try
> to realize that the rest of us (Yes, even Bruce) have VERY similar
> goals and motivations (or we wouldn't be here). If you can cross
> that bridge, then, whenever you feel frustrated by the way things
> are going, realize that many of us are just as frustrated over just
> the same issues. With that in mind, I beg you to consider another
> method of bringing your frustrations to the table.

So i have been aggressive?  I say you might have some perception
problems yourself:

- I did't not announce to withdraw from the project and next thing
  delete all files i had on the master server (Why do so?), including
  files controling the mailing lists.

- I did't disregard the work of those pathching the mailing lists
up and appoint somebody else who needed to repeat their work.
(Sorry Pete, i believe that you are capable and doing the best you can.)

- I didn't disregard the work of those starting to work on the
out-of-date website and appointed somebody else. (Sorry Sue, i know
this is not your fault.  You are doing fine!)

- I didn't disregard the work of those trying to set up a network of
interconnected {www,ftp}.<county>.debian.org servers and "order" the
web team to use the old ftp mirror list as basis for the work.

- I didn't close bugs of other developers when they were engaging in a
constructive debate on a potential problem.

All these things happened in the last couple of weeks, despite
Mr. Perens claim that he is overworked and despite the project falling
way behind schedule of the next release.  And most of them affected
the people now complaining about the current style of leadership.

As it seems right know, i am the only one who finds the situation
unbearable and that leaves as only conclusion that i do no longer fit
into the project.

Therefore i do resign from all responsibilities i have and cease all
activities within and for the project.  My last task will be a final
upload of the kbd package to fix outstanding bugs and to deposite the
current working tree of the web pages development in my homedirectory
on master.  I have already sent mail to the list server removing me
from all internal mailing lists of the project and requested from
those in charge of master.debian.org that my account on master and my
debian.org mail address shall be disabled.

Rest assured that i wish all of you, including Mr. Perens, well and
that you may reach whatever goals you envision for yourself and the
project.

Good bye,
  Dominik Kubla
-- 
The text above represents my personal opinion and does not represent the
official position of my employer on the issue(s) discussed.  Any official
statement by me on behalf of my employer will be marked as such.