Hi, On 24/03/2016 12:55, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Hi Mehdi, > > Last year, Ana started a great thread about the role of the DPL[1]. > > I wonder where you stand wrt the various positions in that thread? > What will be your priorities when deciding what to work on? > What do you see as tasks that the DPL must do, should do, may do, > shouldn't do, mustn't do? >
I pretty much agree with what you wrote in [0]. Contrary to what has been said in that thread, I do not think the constitution should be more specific about DPL tasks. A DPL is defacto a garbage collector, as formally written in the constitution (§5.1.4). Being open about what a DPL can do allows one to innovate and start new things. It is quite difficult to say which tasks should come first when you never did the job before. I imagine tasks with a deadline should be made a priority. Anything that may be blocking the project (or some parts of it) should be on top of the TODO list. In any case, I intend to be quite transparent on my time spent as DPL (if elected) so that folks may have a better understanding of the DPL job. Communication is the crucial bit in this story. Looking at Ana's list of DPL tasks in [1], I have a few remarks: - I do not think the DPL should set technical goals for the project. He should certainly help to make sure goals are set and a consensus is reached though. - My understanding is that dealing with technical problems is the area of action of the Technical Committee. Of course, a DPL can participate during the discussion and may help to resolve the problem… if it is required. Not all technical problems require that though. - Other people may represent the Debian project and give talks on behalf of Debian, not only the DPL (as I've said in [2]). [0] <20150214090708.ga12...@xanadu.blop.info> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2015/02/msg00039.html [2] https://www.debian.org/vote/2016/platforms/mehdi#approach -- Mehdi