On 05/12/13 at 14:26 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Re: Please update the DSA delegation"): > > On 05/12/13 at 09:35 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > > > Perhaps it would make sense to first more clearly define problems we want > > > to solve with the whole delegation process, [...] > ... > > This was discussed in > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2013/05/msg00018.html. > > Lucas, I'm concerned that you apparently have time to debate the > merits of our approach to delegates, but unless I'm mistaken you > haven't found time to simply say "yes" to Hector's promotion to a full > member of the DSA team. > > Is there some reason (besides lack of DPL team attention, and besides > some wider questions about what exactly the delegation should consist > of) why Hector should not be appointed immediately ? If there is such > a reason please say that you are considering the merits of the > appointment. Otherwise please would you confirm it immediately.
At this point, I don't see any reason why I wouldn't eventually delegate Hector, in an update of the DSA delegation. On 05/12/13 at 15:53 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > Maybe I get you wrong - and maybe you got Lucas wrong - but are you > implying that Hector is a controversial nomination? Where did I miss > that part? From what I read in Lucas initial response to Martin, it was > about general communication issues with the (current) DSA team (wheter > or not that might be true), not with Hector specificly. The way you > phrase it makes it rather sound that Hector is a controversial > nomination? At this point, I have no reason to believe that it's controversial. Now, please, can I go back to work? (I'm ignoring the questioning on my use of my time, and the comment on the "lack of DPL team attention") Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131205162710.ga7...@xanadu.blop.info