On 19/11/14 at 22:31 -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 01:59:33PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > On 19/11/14 at 12:25 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:37:25AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > > I fear that, by reducing the average 'age' from 7.8 years to ~2 years, > > > > we are going too far. I would like to make it easier, for some members, > > > > to stay members of the TC for longer than 4 years. OTOH, I don't want > > > > this decision to be taken lightly. > > > > Again, this is true only under the assumption that former members won't > > > come back. > > > > But even with that assumption, it seems you're arguing for the fact that > > > a term limit of 4.5 years (and therefore an average of about half of > > > that, modulo the transition period) is too short. It's hard to judge > > > that in the abstract, but my gut feeling is that it is in fact quite > > > long. Volunteers, especially when active in stress-full roles, do need > > > shorter cycles. > > > I don't think that the TC is a stress-full role. > > <snort>
Steve, I think you know better than to misquote. The full paragraph was: > > I don't think that the TC is a stress-full role. Obviously the recent past > > proved how the role can be incredibly stressful at times. But there has > > also been long periods without much activity, as shown on > > https://www.debian.org/devel/tech-ctte or > > https://lists.debian.org/stats/debian-ctte.png I think that Debian is currently going through a set of difficult decisions, and that the activity level (and stress level) of the TC will return to something more acceptable at some point. If it doesn't, then we have a problem, because I don't think that it's normal to rely so much on a last resort committee. It would say something about our inability to make good decisions in the normal course of actions. Lucas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
