Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Sam Hartman]

So, does someone want to propose a resolution so we can move this
forward?

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Sam Hartman]

> "Ian" == Ian Jackson  writes:

Ian> I know that you do not _set out_ reinforce Ron's position of
Ian> power over his victims.  That is not your goal.  You are trying
Ian> to come to an amicable settlement.  You are trying to get
Ian> everyone to be nice.

Ian> But when people are being oppressed, it is quite wrong to make
Ian> the feelings of the perpetrator a primary consideration.  First
Ian> help the victims, by relieving them from the grasp of their
Ian> oppressor.

I disagree with the idea that this situation is about an aggressor and
victims.
I agree such situations exist.  I do not think this situation currently
is such a situation.

That is key to my position.

I do not think engaging furthure on this point will serve this
discussion.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Ian Jackson]

Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts"):
> I am not prepared to override  those seeking global6 either.

I don't know quite how to put this.  I'm afraid that what I say is
going to sound quite aggressive and hurtful.  But I think it is a very
important point that needs to be made:

By actively resisting the idea that the TC should swiftly make a
concrete and definitive decisioin, you are very directly reinforcing
the blockage which is preventing the prospective global (6)
maintainers from improving Debian.

So you _are_ overriding those seeking global (6).  (TC members who are
saying nothing are contributing to the blockage too: with power comes
a responsibility to use it to right injustice, where one can.)


You've no doubt heard the famous quote by Paulo Freire:

  Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
  powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

But you are doing more than washing your hands.  You are yourself in a
position of power, and you are actively using that position to
reinforce Ron's.

I know that you do not _set out_ reinforce Ron's position of power
over his victims.  That is not your goal.  You are trying to come to
an amicable settlement.  You are trying to get everyone to be nice.

But when people are being oppressed, it is quite wrong to make the
feelings of the perpetrator a primary consideration.  First help the
victims, by relieving them from the grasp of their oppressor.

This is all very dramatic language.  Of course I know this is "only
Debian" and of course no-one is dying here.  But the principles are
the same.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Sam Hartman]

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

    Ian> Sam Hartman writes ("Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts"):
>> Like you I want to see global6 for stretch.  I'm not sure I want
>> to see it bad enough to override someone.  I'd rank doing so
>> above FD though but below a pure advice option.

Ian> Why are you prepared to override[0]

I am not prepared to override  those seeking global6 either.

Ian> but not prepared to override

Ian>   Ron Lee

Because in this instance I believe giving advice is going to be
sufficient to get action.
If some reasonable version of global6 doesn't happen post haste, I could
change my mind in the order of a week or two.

Ian> Have you been reading debian-project ?
No.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Ian Jackson]

Sam Hartman writes ("Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts"):
> Like you I want to see global6 for stretch.
> I'm not sure I want to see it bad enough to override someone.
> I'd rank doing so above FD though but below a pure advice option.

Why are you prepared to override[0]

  Andrew Bailey, Era Eriksson, Markus Grunwald, Thomas Viehweger,
  Hongzheng Wang, Vincent Bernat, Pranith Kumar, Punit Agrawal, Volker
  Mische, Johannes Stezenbach, Wei Liu, Alberto Luaces, Pierre-Elliott
  Becue, Wookey

but not prepared to override

  Ron Lee

?

Have you been reading debian-project ?  From my point of view[1]
perhaps I should give up on trying to persuade TC members.

After all if the TC does not transfer maintainership in such an
extreme situation as this, my job of perusading DDs to vote to give
responsibility for these decisions to someone else is very easy.

Ian.

[0] I have listed all the people who explicitly requested a new
version (assuming, I think, that they are Debian users who want to use
global 6), and the people who have done work to prepare new versions,
in chronological order.  I have excluded Shigio Yamaguchi because I
think their primary status is upstream.

[1] My point of view of trying to fix Debian's totally nonfunctional
processes for dealing with unwarranted blocking by maintainers, which
is a drum I have been banging for years and years now.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Sam Hartman]

Like you I want to see global6 for stretch.
I'm not sure I want to see it bad enough to override someone.
I'd rank doing so above FD though but below a pure advice option.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Didier 'OdyX' Raboud]

Le mercredi, 30 novembre 2016, 14.11:43 h CET Sam Hartman a écrit :
> I'd really like to see the TC offer at least the following advice:
> 
> 1) We believe that strong evidence is required to hold back integrating
> new versions of software like global.  The burden of proof is on those
> who propose not to update, not on those who would like Debian to contain
> current upstream features.
> 
> 2) This burden has not been met with regard to htags and regressions
> related to htags.
> 
> 3) Delays in discussion of this issue over the year suggest that having
> more people involved in maintaining the global package would help
> address  a perception that the maintainer is blocking forward progress.

Absolutely. This would be a the very minimal statement I'd like us to emit. 

> I don't think I'd support giving global to someone else.

I would support handing global to new maintainers, really. We have 4 persons 
who have contributed to the newly-available package in experimental:
https://tracker.debian.org/news/820174
Their total work is a magnitude more than what was given to the package by the 
current maintainer in the last 6 years.

>  I don't think we even need to say "Ron you did something bad."  I do think
>  that Ron contributed to  a harmful perception that damages those who would
>  use and contribute to global in Debian.

I wouldn't support a decision where we state that Ron did something bad. It 
would be unneeded blaming (especially in a TC decision), and unnecessarily 
agressive.

I'd support a decision handing the package to better hands though. For me, it 
is now obvious that there exists a group of maintainers out there who would do 
better service to the maintenance of global, than is currently done.

> If we can find a path forward that gets a new global into Debian, I'd be
> happy only offering advice.  If we get stuck doing that, I think we need
> to overrule something.

Sure, absolutely. But its really also a question of timing, and allowing Ron 
to tell the TC (in direct words, through further NAK'ing, or through inaction) 
"fine, I've won another release with global v5 in, I'll let the package go 
after the release of stretch", we will have rewarded stop-energy and inertia, 
over service to our users.

Although we probably haven't reached consensus, I'd like to see this subject 
move forward; what about the following ballot (with options to be refined, of 
course):

A) Using §6.1.5, the TC offers advice (insert Sam's advice above) about the 
maintenance of src:global.
B) Using §6.1.2, the TC decides that the src:global maintainer is now (insert
 name)
C) Further discussion

-- 
Cheers,
OdyX

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#841294: Global Ballot Thoughts

[Sam Hartman]

I'd really like to see the TC offer at least the following advice:

1) We believe that strong evidence is required to hold back integrating
new versions of software like global.  The burden of proof is on those
who propose not to update, not on those who would like Debian to contain
current upstream features.

2) This burden has not been met with regard to htags and regressions
related to htags.

3) Delays in discussion of this issue over the year suggest that having
more people involved in maintaining the global package would help
address  a perception that the maintainer is blocking forward progress.

I don't think I'd support giving global to someone else.  I don't think
we even need to say "Ron you did something bad."  I do think that Ron
contributed to  a harmful perception that damages those who would use and
contribute to global in Debian.
I think taking steps like involning others in the process would be good
in fighting that perception and would be good for the package at a
technical level.
If we can find a path forward that gets a new global into Debian, I'd be
happy only offering advice.  If we get stuck doing that, I think we need
to overrule something.