Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 06:45:46PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 05:08:52PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: If I could get a copy of the Secretary's running source code I could also change it so that options were lettered rather than numbered. That would be /much/ less confusing... master.debian.org:/org/vote.debian.org/ I've put all my changes in git and it's available at: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/kroeckx/devotee.git;a=summary It's about to move to a new host When that's done I'll also make it available on the vote website, and point the website to it. The running version isn't completly the same as the version in git, the files are in other directories. But all the code that's used should be in git. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120709171708.ga22...@roeckx.be
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
]] Kurt Roeckx It's about to move to a new host, and I'm not sure if DSA is still going to give everybody access to that host. I imagine that depends on what the secretary asks us to, with us having a slight-to-medium preference for making it restricted. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aa0e46ca@qurzaw.varnish-software.com
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Wed, Jun 06 2012, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: The voters' preferences are a bit annoying to grep for etc. because they aren't normalised. So I wrote the script below, just now. If someone would like to include it in some package with a suitable name, and perhaps give it a manpage, please do so. Alternatively feel free to just take it of course. Rather than having a separate utility to do so packaged, I'd rather prefer to have devotee output normalized tally sheets. Doing so seems compatible with the transparency principle of Debian public votes. The existence of obscured votes due to the lack of normalization seems to be nothing more than a bug in how we present results. Did you consider turning your script into a devotee patch? devotee is written in Perl too, so it's potentially not to hard to just plug your script in as a patch. Thanks for your script (and for considering the patch idea)! Cheers. I'll be happy to add a normalization filter while publishing a cooked tally sheet. I would still prefer to keep the raw tally sheet around on the grounds of using a tally sheet minimal changes to how the voter actually voted (minimal changes, and because the current system kinda works). Once I get my act together again, I have devotee v 2.0 that I think is generally useful enough to package, since I have moved it to a command pattern based workflow, and thus people may add modules (check gpg sigs) or remove tham (no ldap checks), and move the action noides around at will (do gpg checks _after_ ldap checks) manoj -- If I do not return to the pulpit this weekend, millions of people will go to hell.-- Jimmy Swaggart, 5/20/88 Manoj Srivastava sriva...@acm.org http://www.golden-gryphon.com/ 4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20 05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C pgp4RAQELkv1W.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Michael Gilbert writes (Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results): ... Why is it that devotee has moved to a private development model? This seems to be contrary to Debian's goal of maximal openness, and the previous secretary openly published his work: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/srivasta/debian/devotee.git Please try to be nicer. The Secretary is doing a job for all of us and we should be supportive, not aggressive. I would also very much like the source code to be available. In practice the only way this is practical is if it doesn't add significant overhead to the Secretary's workflow. My own experience with providing ad-hoc online services on similar scales is that `cowboying' fixes in a local tree is too useful to be outlawed; therefore we need a mechanism that ensures that such fixes are automatically published without the Secretary having to do extra work to commit it, make releases, or whatever. I would be willing to write a patch to devotee to make it automatically publish its own source code. Kurt and Neil: would you accept such a change ? I can happily clone the code from master. That's nice for review and study, bit it would be even more ideal if the code were available on a DD-writable repo (perhaps within collab-maint). IMO the requirement is for the Secretary to publish the code being used. Not for them to manage a collaborative development project, unless they want to. Thanks, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20432.35918.830124.566...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 12:11:10PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Michael Gilbert writes (Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results): ... Why is it that devotee has moved to a private development model? This seems to be contrary to Debian's goal of maximal openness, and the previous secretary openly published his work: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/srivasta/debian/devotee.git I believe that this (certainly when I took over) was stored in arch. As I had no knowlegde of arch, and the code was (and substantially still is) the same, there wasn't much point in pushing it. I'm very pleased to see a migration to git. I would be willing to write a patch to devotee to make it automatically publish its own source code. Kurt and Neil: would you accept such a change ? I can happily clone the code from master. I'd be happy to take this, and though I can't speak for Kurt it sounds sensible to me. That's nice for review and study, bit it would be even more ideal if the code were available on a DD-writable repo (perhaps within collab-maint). IMO the requirement is for the Secretary to publish the code being used. Not for them to manage a collaborative development project, unless they want to. Given the overhead of actually running a vote and trying to then deal with people with broken mailers and estoric encodings, I'd really rather not have to then re-deploy a package or something while we're in the middle of a GR. If someone wants to take whatever Ian's script produces and package it, that's fine, although I'm not entirely convinced how useful that would be. Having maintained 'blootbot' in the past, packaging programs that are substantially used just on Debian services isn't actually a productive use of time. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120607122216.gp4...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Neil McGovern writes (Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results): Given the overhead of actually running a vote and trying to then deal with people with broken mailers and estoric encodings, I'd really rather not have to then re-deploy a package or something while we're in the middle of a GR. Quite. The `get source' functionality should work automatically out of the actual tree in use. If you use multiple different trees for multiple different steps, there should be one published source code for each one in case they differ. I'll have to look at the code and the directory on master to understand the workflow. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20432.43124.159887.766...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 01:22:16PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
If someone wants to take whatever Ian's script produces and package it,
that's fine, although I'm not entirely convinced how useful that would
be. Having maintained 'blootbot' in the past, packaging programs that
are substantially used just on Debian services isn't actually a
productive use of time.
OTOH it's not surprising that devotee is used only by Debian if even
Debian Developers have troubles finding its sources :-)
As a data point: I've been asked a few times (5-6 range, IIRC, but I
could check my archives) by other projects if they could reuse devotee
for their own voting, as they wanted to give email voting a try over
webapps. I had to say yes, but... because it was non trivial to deploy
and because it's tightly coupled with Debian's LDAP.
But I'm convinced that if the dependency can be loosened and if the
software were just a apt-get install devotee away, others will use
it. And it will also be a good service to be offered to various
communities. (Not to mention that it would become easier to find people
to fix bugs, such as the PRNG issue.)
No blame whatsoever is intended in the above: devotee has been developed
for Debian purposes and it's serving us well as it is. But I do
challenge the argument that devotee is not interesting/useful for
others, because I don't think it is distributed in a way that is
comparable with usual free software standards.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: But I'm convinced that if the dependency can be loosened and if the software were just a apt-get install devotee away, others will use it. And it will also be a good service to be offered to various communities. (Not to mention that it would become easier to find people to fix bugs, such as the PRNG issue.) No blame whatsoever is intended in the above: devotee has been developed for Debian purposes and it's serving us well as it is. But I do challenge the argument that devotee is not interesting/useful for others, because I don't think it is distributed in a way that is comparable with usual free software standards. Well, Debian does excell on downstream maintenance (although several of us are quite acceptable at upstream maintenance as well). If we can take care of setting up a public automated git tree for the secretary to get up-to-date-in-production devotee code in the open with minimal fuss for the secretary's workload/workflow, it shouldn't be difficult to find a few DDs/DMs to do the devotee release management (upstream work) and also the Debian downstream work to take care of packaging and user-level QA. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120607142213.ga27...@khazad-dum.debian.net
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx writes (General Resolution: Diversity
statement results):
The results of the General Resolution is that the diversity
statement has been accepted.
...
The tally sheet is at:
http://master.debian.org/~secretary/diversity/tally.txt
The voters' preferences are a bit annoying to grep for etc. because
they aren't normalised. So I wrote the script below, just now.
If someone would like to include it in some package with a suitable
name, and perhaps give it a manpage, please do so. Alternatively feel
free to just take it of course.
The licence of the version below is MIT or CC0 at your option. Feel
free to upgrade to whatever licence is appropriate for the package it
goes into.
Ian.
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
while () {
if (!m/^V: ([-1-9]+)(\s)/) {
print or die $!;
next;
}
my $rhs = $2.$'; #';
my $vlist = $1;
my $oldvlist = $vlist;
my $next = 1;
foreach my $dig (1..9) {
my $any = $vlist =~ s/$dig/$next/g;
#print STDERR $vlist | $dig | $next | $any\n;
next unless $any;
$next++;
}
if ($vlist !~ m/-/) {
my $undo = $next-1;
$vlist =~ s/$undo/-/g;
}
# next if $vlist eq $oldvlist;
print V: $vlist [$oldvlist] $rhs or die $!;
}
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/20431.26661.539748.580...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
The voters' preferences are a bit annoying to grep for etc. because
they aren't normalised. So I wrote the script below, just now.
If someone would like to include it in some package with a suitable
name, and perhaps give it a manpage, please do so. Alternatively feel
free to just take it of course.
Rather than having a separate utility to do so packaged, I'd rather
prefer to have devotee output normalized tally sheets. Doing so seems
compatible with the transparency principle of Debian public votes. The
existence of obscured votes due to the lack of normalization seems to
be nothing more than a bug in how we present results.
Did you consider turning your script into a devotee patch? devotee is
written in Perl too, so it's potentially not to hard to just plug your
script in as a patch.
Thanks for your script (and for considering the patch idea)!
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results): On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: The voters' preferences are a bit annoying to grep for etc. because they aren't normalised. So I wrote the script below, just now. If someone would like to include it in some package with a suitable name, and perhaps give it a manpage, please do so. Alternatively feel free to just take it of course. Rather than having a separate utility to do so packaged, I'd rather prefer to have devotee output normalized tally sheets. Doing so seems compatible with the transparency principle of Debian public votes. The existence of obscured votes due to the lack of normalization seems to be nothing more than a bug in how we present results. I think there may be information in people's non-normalised votes. For example on the diversity ballot `-2' seems to say `I'd rather just forget about this' in a way that `-1' doesn't. Did you consider turning your script into a devotee patch? devotee is written in Perl too, so it's potentially not to hard to just plug your script in as a patch. Where is the source code to devotee then ? Ideally there would be a link to a copy of the actually-used source code on the Secretary's output pages. If I could get a copy of the Secretary's running source code I could also change it so that options were lettered rather than numbered. That would be /much/ less confusing... Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20431.32916.851334.519...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 05:08:52PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: If I could get a copy of the Secretary's running source code I could also change it so that options were lettered rather than numbered. That would be /much/ less confusing... master.debian.org:/org/vote.debian.org/ It's about to move to a new host, and I'm not sure if DSA is still going to give everybody access to that host. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120606164546.ga12...@roeckx.be
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On 06/06/2012 01:08 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: I think there may be information in people's non-normalised votes. For example on the diversity ballot `-2' seems to say `I'd rather just forget about this' in a way that `-1' doesn't. Or my mail client broke my vote and I didn't catch it and fix it. My vote of '12' was rendered precisely as '-2' by icedove 10 and 11 + enigma 1.4 and 1.4.1 respectively because it insisted on rewrapping the whole response the minute I pressed 'Send' (in spite of all efforts to make it not do that: a promising looking setting in engima, a plugin someone on #debian-devel suggested ...). I wonder how many other votes were affected in this way? I eventually gave up on icedove+enigma in disgust and just cast my vote via mutt. Ben -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fcf8bdf.8010...@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On 06/06/2012 01:57 PM, Ben Armstrong wrote: My vote of '12' was rendered precisely as '-2' by icedove 10 and 11 + enigma 1.4 and 1.4.1 oops, enigmail*, of course -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fcf8d1d.4050...@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Hi, On 06.06.2012 18:57, Ben Armstrong wrote: I wonder how many other votes were affected in this way? I had the same problem for the DPL vote earlier this year. It turned out the actual problem is a quite strange misunderstanding of who is supposed to do mail formatting between Thunderbird (i.e. Icedove) and Enigmail which I used to sign my mails inline. The problem disappears if you switch to detached PGP/MIME signatures. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
* Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org [2012-06-06 17:54:12 CEST]: On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:24:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: The voters' preferences are a bit annoying to grep for etc. because they aren't normalised. So I wrote the script below, just now. If someone would like to include it in some package with a suitable name, and perhaps give it a manpage, please do so. Alternatively feel free to just take it of course. Rather than having a separate utility to do so packaged, I'd rather prefer to have devotee output normalized tally sheets. Doing so seems compatible with the transparency principle of Debian public votes. The existence of obscured votes due to the lack of normalization seems to be nothing more than a bug in how we present results. Please only as additional document, not as base tally sheets, and making it clear that the original tally sheet is used for calculating the results. People otherwise would come along stating that this is not what I voted, and given that the used calculation of the results require a fair bit of understanding, I would otherwise fear additional confusion. Just my 0.02 cent, Rhonda -- Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los | Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los| Wir sind Helden Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los| -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120606174813.ga27...@anguilla.debian.or.at
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement results
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote: On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 05:08:52PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: If I could get a copy of the Secretary's running source code I could also change it so that options were lettered rather than numbered. That would be /much/ less confusing... master.debian.org:/org/vote.debian.org/ It's about to move to a new host, and I'm not sure if DSA is still going to give everybody access to that host. Why is it that devotee has moved to a private development model? This seems to be contrary to Debian's goal of maximal openness, and the previous secretary openly published his work: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/srivasta/debian/devotee.git That's nice for review and study, bit it would be even more ideal if the code were available on a DD-writable repo (perhaps within collab-maint). Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANTw=MN8guM+mu+08GAx=qhxz8qhifd_o872lbcx1+gqpdt...@mail.gmail.com
