Hi Paul, On 14/03/2016 04:25, Paul Wise wrote: > Hi Mehdi, > > Lars Wirzenius recently wrote a blog post entitled "Not-platform for > Debian project leader elections 2016". I wonder if you have any > thoughts on what he has written there: > > http://blog.liw.fi/posts/dpl-2016-not-platform/ >
liw's platform is devided into two parts. First part shows describes opinion about DPL's role. Then, another part follows about the idea of the "social committee". I mostly share what he wrote about the role of the DPL. It describes in a few items where a DPL can be expected to act. There might be a little mix between people's expectations and real priorities of a DPL though. Inspiring and motivating people is, at least IMHO, a little different from making things run smoothly. Indeed, DPL's primary focus should be to make sure there are no big blockers, and that people are able to get things done (in a satisfactory way by Debian standards). Inspiring and motivating people should be everyone's job! It is not something that a DPL should do specifically. It might be a way to make things run smoothly, but it is not a goal per se. Motivating people day after day can be done simply by trying to be helpful, replying in a respectful way, being welcoming, etc… Inspiring people is a much harder job, and people should not wait to become a DPL in order to try! As I said in my platform, innovation is expected from every project member. Inspiration is no different. The second idea of the platform is about the fact that the DPL is overwhelmed by social conflicts and spends a lot of time trying to resolve them. liw explains that a dedicated committee might help by taking this burden off the shoulders of the DPL. I acknowledge the issue and I sympathize with the idea but I am not sure how it could be applied in real life. Conflicts can hardly be characterized. Mediation is not an easy task and requires (IMHO) some creativity and patience. I don't think that finding a committee that will be suitable for all sorts of conflicts is realistic. If a problem escalated to the DPL, then I see (at least) 3 main situations: 1) The requester doesn't know who to ask to resolve the issue; 2) Involved people need a new opinion on the matter; 3) The issue got worse and nobody is able to speak to each other. First, I expect the DPL to understand the nature of the conflict and identify involved parties. I don't expect the DPL to do miracles in conflicts like #3 above. Then, a DPL may try to resolve the conflict by himself or delegate, when possible. This is all theory though. I don't have an accurate idea of the amount of conflicts where a DPL is asked for help. I don't imagine the number to be huge, but I expect subject to be lengthy and require a large amount of time until resolution (in best case). We don't know who would be motivated enough to help when issues occur. Maybe that's the purpose of the proposed committee. But I don't see what kind of special authority it could have (anyone is free to send mails and talk to people). It'd help to have a list of people available and ready to help resolving conflicts, if ever asked to. That surely will ease the DPL's job to some degree. Whether the list is a committee or not doesn't seem relevant. As the committee is described in liw's non-platform, I am tempted to say that our social committee is all project members. It should not be bound to one entity. Regards, -- Mehdi
