Charles Plessy dijo [Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:54:24PM +0900]: > Hi Moray, > > what you wrote here presents the end of a delegation as a final point. > However, I was very interested by your use of "rotation", which I was > understanding as a faster turnover where the responsibility of the delegation > is passed through developers according to the pool of compentent people. > Taking the Debian Policy Editors as example, I would not mind being replaced > in > October 2013, and (provided that I still have the free time), I would not mind > serving again from October 2104. All of this without reducing my contribution > in terms of patches, but only rotating who is responsible for committing them.
I propose a toast, both for your projected longevity and for our project's! I don't see it as healthy, however, to set a period of *90 years* between stepping down from a delegated role to occupy it again. However, this topic does raise a question: Knowledge transfer. I might be arguing on something marginally related to the vote at hand, but anyway, when delegations shift (be it due to burnout, retirement, rotation or whatever), we should make it as easy as possible to transfer the acquired knowledge from the ex-delegates to the new delegates. Writing documentation is often seen as a boring, painful task. Yet, it is a very important thing to do. So, prospective DPLs, would you see as part of the delegation the requirement for outgoing (if possible, I know it's not always the case) and incoming delegates an obligation to check and update documentation with the latest practices? (yes, the question is almost trivial and somewhat silly... But lost knowledge due to insufficiently communicating team members can hurt the whole project!) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130329043624.ga53...@gwolf.org
