Re: question for all candidates

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 03:34:33PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> - Keyring Mainainance
>   The only person working on this is very busy. More redundancy
>   and a more user-driven attitude could help a lot. I have been
>   talking to the keyring maintainer on several occasions last year
>   but we have not yet found a way or a candiate to help.
>   Ideas? Nominations?

So, since I have a pretty good relationship with James, I'm aware of
three instances of issues with key updates after revocations in the past
few months.

The first was Chip Salzenburg's request for a key update, subsequent
flaming over lack of responsiveness, and eventual resignation. AIUI,
Chip happened to make the request when James was particularly busy,
including increasingly demanding requests each day following that for a
week, and pestering James on work channels (#ubuntu-devel). Chip's key
updates were included in the next keyring update, unfortunately after that
had escalated into a flamewar on -devel, and Chip's resignation. The DPL
sent a request through to James about how that was handled, which James
responded to in some detail. To the best of my knowledge there was no
further followup from the DPL or the DPL team.

The second key replacement I'm familiar with was that of Simon Horms,
who (not long after Chip's resignation) /msg'ed me asking if I had any
idea if the replacement request he'd sent a couple of days earlier had
been received; I said that wasn't something I could check, and suggested
he /msg elmo with a polite request to see it had been received, since
keyring-maint tends to get buried under spam. I didn't hear anything
since, and ttbomk Horms was able to upload again pretty quickly.

The third was Andres Salomon; I prodded him about some random bug for
some random testing transition, and he replied that he couldn't do much
about it without his key getting replaced -- which he'd tried to get
done months ago. I spoke to James to see what was going on, he checked
his mailbox and found absolutely nothing about it. When I passed this
on to Andres, it turned out the mail requesting the update hadn't been
sent in the first place. That was rectified, and his key was updated
within a week or so.

In the mail to the DPL I mentioned above, James outlined three fairly
significant technical changes that could be implemented to make the
job easier, and could be done by anyone, without requiring any special
priveleges; and also noted why he doesn't believe it's technically
feasible to have the keyring maintained by multiple people, and how that
could be fixed.

So, I don't see how you can say how you "have not found a way to
help", and in all the cases I've seen, I don't think there's been any
significant problem in the way updates have been handled, at least on
the keyring-maint's behalf.

> - FTP-Masters
>   Transparency has improved and new people have been added.
>   FTP-Masters have problems interacting with some other high
>   profile, active developers, though.

We chatted about this on IRC at the beginning of October, to wit:

22:50  (i note you didn't come up with any specific problems in how 
ftpmaster's operating)
22:51  do you want to know?
22:51  why wouldn't i?
22:51  i asked, didn't i?
22:51  because you would perceive it as nagging.
22:51  huh?
22:52  lol
22:52  not???
22:52  i can send it in a mail if you want to
22:52  must run now.
22:52  the only thing i can think that would be nagging is if you're going 
   to say "stable updates taking a while", which doesn't strike me as 
   particularly exciting
22:53  sure, i can do that, then (c:

You didn't /msg me again until December, on a largely unrelated matter;
and never sent any email of that nature. Would you care to detail why
not, or what you or the DPL team were working on instead of communicating
your concerns to us?

In any event, it's very difficult to make improvements when people won't
tell you what the problems they see are, or don't find any improvement
to ever be good enough.

(The r1 update to sarge was delayed for a couple of reasons iirc; one
that I've forgotten, the other was due to the delay in the finalisation
of some fairly critical security updates for the kernel. The update
happened a couple of days after they were prepared, in spite of some
random problems coincidently caused by Horms' key replacement)

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions for all candidates about developer behavior and abuse

[Anthony Towns]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 04:53:40PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> At what point does a Debian Developer's behavior cross the line from
> annoying to destructive?  At what point should the Developer be removed
> from the project [...]

I tend to think crossing the line once should result in polite correction;
crossing the line repeatedly, in spite of correction, should result in
some sort of action being taken to limit the harm, and removal from the
project should only happen when those limitations have proven ineffective.

> The reason for my question?
>  jonas: i hope we never again meet in public, because i promise i
> will hit you if i do.

From today's mail:

] Again, sorry for having let my frustration take over me yesterday, i will try
] to not make it happen again, but i hope to get a bit more credit when i say
] things like that in the future.

-- http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2006/03/msg00078.html

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions to candidates Towns and van Wolffelaar: debian-volatile

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:22:54PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> 2.) Do you think this services should be made an official service of the
> debian project? Please give a reason for your answer.

I like to think of debian.net as an area where we experiment for things that
might or might not become debian.org later. The main reason to keep something
as debian.net on an ongoing basis (rather than turn it into debian.org) is if
we can't actually support it properly, in which case we should fix that.

> 3.) What do you think about including a volatile section into the main
> debian archive? (How) can this still be handled by the current
> volatile team?

I'm not really familiar with that to comment in depth; I suspect the
practical concerns should disappear with the mirror split (but obviously,
we'll need to have another look when that's settled), and I'm not sure
what sort of procedure is actually desired. There's been some ongoing
suggestions about just including volatile stuff in stable updates; it
might make sense to have an SRM team where Joey reviews security updates
and similar things, while someone from the volatile team approves other
updates.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question for all candidates: handle debian-admin more openly

[Martin Schulze]

Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:56:57PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > Now my question:
> > 
> > 1.) Do you think it would be a good idea to handle debian-admin more
> > openly? 
> > 
> > 2.) Would you encourage debian-admin to do so? If yes, how?
> > 
> > 3.) Do you think more DSA are needed?
> 
> I would like to experiment with "DSA assistants". The idea is that some
> Debian machines could not need special priviledge to operate and are not
> critical to operation, so they could be operated by "DSA assistants"
> which would have much less priviledges. This could reduce the work on
> the DSA and allow Debian to operate more machines, and "DSA assistants"
> could eventually became full DSA once they gather the trust of the DSA
> team. This could also increase transparency as a side effect.

You mean, like the site-admin who maintains the host already?
(i.e. Matt for paer, merulo, gluck; wiggy for klecker; etc.?)

> Alioth is a debian.org machine with a separate set of admin, so there is
> a precedent.

No.  Alioth is not DSA maintained, that's totally different setup.

> Example of non-priviledged services include secondary web services and
> developers accessible port machines with separate accounts.  As an
> aside, I think there should be more developers-accessible port machines.

Why?

For which ports?

Regards,

Joey

-- 
MIME - broken solution for a broken design.  -- Ralf Baechle


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:16:34AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> I'd like to ask some questions to the prospecitve project leaders:
> 1. Which are Debians top five strengths in your opinion?

In no particular order:

  Breadth -- we include everything we can, and support whoever we can
  Freedom -- we're very focussed on free software
  Openness -- anybody can see what we're doing
  Quality -- we have good tools and policies and work to maintain them
  Volunteerism -- we're not dependent on a funding source or a business plan

> 2. Where do you identify Debians top five problems?

  Conflict -- we focus on and exaggerate disagreements to the point where they
  hinder improvement
  Hurdles to contributing -- helping out in many areas is difficult, from the
  time and effort to go through n-m, to getting involved in various
  subparts of the project after you're a developer; not all of 
those 
  hurdles are useful
  Indecisiveness -- we leave things unresolved for extended periods
  Lack of momentum -- continual improvement begets continual improvement, and
  that needs to happen at all levels of the proejct

> 3. Do you plan to do anything to change the public recognition that
>Debian suffers from severe release problems and that its stable
>distribution is generally outdated?  If so, what?

In so far as Debian does have severe release problems, or its stable
distribution is generally outdated, I think the public _should_ have
that perception. And as far as fixing that perception goes, I think we
should fix the underlying problem first, before we expect people to stop
thinking there's a problem.

That said, I think we're making good progress on that in three ways:
first, the release team have a good plan and support for ensuring
that past problems don't repeat themselves -- including ensuring that
architectures don't have ongoing problems, that the installer remains
working properly, and that the security infrastructure is working for
etch at release time; second, I think the d-i beta releases for etch can
fairly easily be enhanced into something suitable for people who want
significantly more frequent releases; and finally I think the stable
point releases should be significantly more controllable by 3.1r3,
as per the other thread.

> 4. In light of the well organised presence of Skolelinux and the
>professional presence of Ubuntu at several conferences and exhibitions
>do you believe Debian is represented adequately?

I can't comment specifically; but in general I'd say that Debian should
be represented as well as people want to represent it -- if there are
blockages there, such as an inability to get permission to use the Debian
trademark, or availability of funds, or ability to announce a presence
and find and coordinate people to do the promotion, then that's bad. If
it's just that people don't think conferences or exhibitions are worth
the effort, it's not such a problem.

> 5. Do you see any services for our users or developers missing or
>poorly maintained?  If so, which and what do you plan to do to
>fix this?

I've done this in the past, and expect to keep doing so whether elected or
not. I guess I don't really see the point of the question.

> 6. What is your opinion about the current situation with the backports
>and volatile archives?  Currently they don't run on projects assets.

I'd like to see them integrated into the archive, much as we had a
separate section for backports to bo when the libc6 transition was
underway. There are various concerns with doing that, many of which I
hope the mirror split will mostly alleviate.

> 7. What is your opinion about the current situation with the snapshot
>archive?  Currently it doesn't run on projects assets.

It's a useful service. TTBOMK we don't have any debian.org machines
that would be suitable to host it, but that's something you (as DSA)
can probably answer better than I can anyway; I know I've seen concerns
expressed about having machines not running Debian hosting it, as far as
"debian.org" status is concerned.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Code of conduct, question to all candidates

[Matthew Garrett]

Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> At this point, I am not in favour of such code. I am in favour of giving
> general guidelines and but not to enforce them.  People should follow
> them because they agree with them but not because they are forced to.
> Not the least, that provides a reality check to the guidelines.

What do you believe should be done about people who refuse to follow 
such guidelines?

(As a reference point, I am no longer on any significant Debian mailing
lists other than -vote because I am sick of people who behave in an 
anti-social manner towards each other. Allowing people to behave as they 
wish to has a direct cost to the project)
-- 
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Questions to candidates Towns and van Wolffelaar: debian-volatile

[Stephen Gran]

This one time, at band camp, Martin Zobel-Helas said:
> Hi Ari,
> 
> On Wednesday, 08 Mar 2006, you wrote:
> > Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > >1.) What is your opinion regarding the current status of debian-volatile?
> > >... more questions about volatile ...
> > 
> > Wasn't this just asked by Joey? 
> 
> yes, in some parts. But as i consider myself as one of the
> debian-volatile team, i had some more (extended) questions. Am i not
> allowed to ask them?

During this campaigning period, it would be better to address your
questions to Zeke instead of Ari, as Zeke seems to be the brains of the
outfit.
-- 
 -
|   ,''`.Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|  `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer |
|`- http://www.debian.org |
 -


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions to candidates Towns and van Wolffelaar: debian-volatile

[Ari Pollak]

Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:

1.) What is your opinion regarding the current status of debian-volatile?
... more questions about volatile ...


Wasn't this just asked by Joey?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Questions to candidates Towns and van Wolffelaar: debian-volatile

[Martin Zobel-Helas]

Hi Ari,

On Wednesday, 08 Mar 2006, you wrote:
> Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> >1.) What is your opinion regarding the current status of debian-volatile?
> >... more questions about volatile ...
> 
> Wasn't this just asked by Joey? 

yes, in some parts. But as i consider myself as one of the
debian-volatile team, i had some more (extended) questions. Am i not
allowed to ask them?

Greetings
Martin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Addition to my DPL-team

[Andreas Schuldei]

I am happy to announce that both Margarita Manterola
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> would
be willing to work on my DPL Team, should I get elected.

Margarita would be our community contact person.

Thank you very much, Margarita and Raphael, for your commitment
to Debian!

That means that so far the DPL-team would consist of 
Andreas Barth , Steve Langasek, Neil McGovern, Margarita
Manterola, Raphael Hertzog and myself.

/andreas


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about the NM process

[Don Armstrong]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> * Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-07 12:34:05]:
> > [In short, if this is such a problem, what have you all been doing in
> > your personal capacity as developers to deal with it?]

[...]

> Apart from that, your question implies that one has to attempt to
> solve every problem in debian yourself, once you notice it. That is
> quite impossible.
>
> You have to both prioritize the critical issues over the lesser ones
> and decide if *you* are the right person with the right skills and
> motivations to engage in that specific problem.

Definetly. However, the question doesn't exclude someone saying that
they don't feel that they're the proper person to be dealing with this
specific problem, or that the problem is one that is not serious
enough to merit spending the time necessary to address it.

I'm just concerned about the disingenuous way in which some problems
are addressed in Debian, where people who aren't interested in putting
in the effort to solve the problem heckle those who are attempting to
do so, and some of the responses to this issue seemed to be heading
this way.


Don Armstrong

-- 
[]

http://www.donarmstrong.com  http://rzlab.ucr.edu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Questions for all candidates about developer behavior and abuse

[Eduard Bloch]

#include 
* Andres Salomon [Tue, Mar 07 2006, 04:53:40PM]:

> The reason for my question?
> 
>  jonas: i hope we never again meet in public, because i promise i
> will hit you if i do.

A-Ha. Let's buy them two boxing sets and popcorn for the rest of us.

Eduard.
-- 
 anyone from the MIA team around? tbm?
 sounds nice. how long do you have to be MIA to get into that team? :)
 you need to have a pgp key, I suppose. and no gpg one, and only a bo box
 yes, but it must be expired


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question for all candidates: handle debian-admin more openly

[Bill Allombert]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:56:57PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Now my question:
> 
> 1.) Do you think it would be a good idea to handle debian-admin more
> openly? 
> 
> 2.) Would you encourage debian-admin to do so? If yes, how?
> 
> 3.) Do you think more DSA are needed?

I would like to experiment with "DSA assistants". The idea is that some
Debian machines could not need special priviledge to operate and are not
critical to operation, so they could be operated by "DSA assistants"
which would have much less priviledges. This could reduce the work on
the DSA and allow Debian to operate more machines, and "DSA assistants"
could eventually became full DSA once they gather the trust of the DSA
team. This could also increase transparency as a side effect.

Alioth is a debian.org machine with a separate set of admin, so there is
a precedent.

Example of non-priviledged services include secondary web services and
developers accessible port machines with separate accounts.  As an
aside, I think there should be more developers-accessible port machines.

Some such services are operated on non-Debian hosts already, but I think
we should try to integrate some of them to give more visibility both to
the service and the Debian developers in charge of them.

Cheers,
Bill.


pgpUJW8OKfYWR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Code of conduct, question to all candidates

[Bill Allombert]

On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 10:20:59PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> What do you think of a code of conduct? What in your opinion would be a
> lower limit on acceptable behavior? Do you think that strict rules would
> be better than general guidelines? Who should be the judge if a
> particular case follows the code of conduct or not? Would the code be a
> good thing, or would it necessarily be a threat to freedom of speech,
> and stifle innovation? Should any kind of behavior be allowed on Debian
> mailing lists?

Debian already has a "code of conduct", it is the Social Contract and the
Developers Reference. It regulates how people deal with packages, bug
reports and other Debian resources.

For the mailing-lists,  a code of conduct already exist, see
.

So actually, the question is what we think of a code of conduct 
regulating behaviour on mailing-lists.

At this point, I am not in favour of such code. I am in favour of giving
general guidelines and but not to enforce them.  People should follow
them because they agree with them but not because they are forced to.
Not the least, that provides a reality check to the guidelines.

The main issue is that there is no consensus in Debian about what a code
of conduct should say.  We have all very different cultural background
and while we should be collectively biaised toward favoring "free
speech", it appears we have very different opinion about what is
appropriate on mailing-lists. However the diversity of the Debian
developers is an asset and should not be sacrificed to the code of
conduct.

Among the developers apparently in favor of a code of conduct, they are
some whose behaviour IMHO cannot stand as a model. I doubt a code of
conduct would lead them to amend their way but rather to abuse the
code of conduct because they are convinced they are in the right.

So I expect that in the current situation a strict code of conduct would 
actually make the matter worse by being abused to harass people and
would create tension in the project.

This does not mean we should not try to improve our collective
behaviour however, and I proposed some guideline to that effect.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 


pgp5TKOdo90j9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Second call for votes for the GFDL position statement

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 07:03:52AM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> Then mail the ballot to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters
> (">") that your reply inserts. NOTE: The vote must be GPG signed
> (or PGP signed) with your key that is in the Debian keyring. 
> 
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 25a628e9-d88e-40b7-8e1c-888cff421ea5
> [   ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases
> [ 1 ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free
> [ 2 ] Choice 3: GFDL-licensed works are compatible with the DFSG [needs 3:1]
> [   ] Choice 4: Further discussion
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: For Andreas: how can you work full-time for DPL

[Andreas Schuldei]

* Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-06 14:42:54]:

> those questions are for Andreas only: twice in your platform you say 
> "I can work full-time as DPL".
> 
> Why can you make that claim ?
> 
> If you any have any special arrangements to have free time for Debian, is that
> conditioned to your election or will you benefit from those even if you're
> not elected ?

last year i explained this further:

"Presently I am paid to work on Debian-Edu. I would continue to
enjoy the support of my employer, if elected, as he believes the
role of DPL is crucial to Debian - this would also allow me to
work on DPL issues during work hours."

This remains true, except that during the last year I did only
little technical work on Debian-Edu but moved more and more to
full time DPLish tasks like coordination and organisation.

Currently I work on raising funds for the Foundation behind
Debian-Edu, so that they can keep employing me and others.  The
good people of the Foundation think that my work as a DPL would
benefit Debian considerably and indirectly further Debian-Edu,
since it would have a better base to build on.



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about the NM process

[Andreas Schuldei]

* Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-07 12:34:05]:

> [In short, if this is such a problem, what have you all been doing in
> your personal capacity as developers to deal with it?]

I was not involved in the NM process actively, just talked to the
respective people to find out what would be required in the
current process to have a procedure for non-packagers like
artists, translators, lawyers etc and trying to motive them to
create those. (Some of those exist already, but I think I didnt
have much to do with their creation.)

Apart from that, your question implies that one has to attempt to
solve every problem in debian yourself, once you notice it. That is
quite impossible. 

You have to both prioritize the critical issues over the lesser
ones and decide if *you* are the right person with the right
skills and motivations to engage in that specific problem. If you
decide that you are not the right person you could still try to
find someone else to do the work, but that is an other art
altogether. One that I attempt from time to time, with varing
success.

/andreas


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Andreas Schuldei]

* Andrew Saunders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-08 09:40:21]:
> Why has this not happened yet? Could we please have an update on this?

Because the responsible person at NetApp (one of the VPs) is a
busy man.

I recently got news on the topic and that the machine is being
worked on. I dont have a date when it will arrive in Umeå.
The two Intel servers are in place already, though.





signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Code of conduct, question to all candidates

[Andreas Schuldei]

* Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-03 22:20:59]:
> A code of conduct has often been mentioned as a possible solution to
> various communication problems we have. The code would have to specify,
> either explicitly or implicitly, some rules for acceptable behavior. 
> 
> What do you think of a code of conduct? 

We have an implicit code of conduct right now. It is practiced on
some lists and it hurts the project, in my oppinion. What we need
is a change of culture in the project. That is a hard, longterm
change. Already at Debconf3 in Oslo I gave a talk "Why Tetrinet
is good for Debian - Debian as a social group" and highlighted
the importance of a friendly, warm climate in the project. If
momentum builds within the project that we need a change of
climate we will have it. We can help that to happen. My cited
experience with implementing social change in volunteer groups
can help here.

Formulating a code of conduct that we want to encourage is one
important step. Making it known, talking about it, discussing it
and moving it towards being a commonly accepted guide line is
hard work and will take many years. 

Shortcuts will fail. 

We have started already, and have only a few years left to go.
Lets continue!

/andreas


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: question for all candidates

[Andreas Schuldei]

* Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-07 20:09:11]:
> > When important teams seem to be disfunctional or have a hard time to
> > find a structure that scales into the future I would however use my
> > powers of delegation to restructure the team from the outside. I would
> > only do that after I worked with the team to help it overcome it's
> > issues itself, however.
> 
> If you were DPL right now, which teams would you consider making formal 
> delegates regardless of their wishes?

It would depend on weather I had good additional people that
could make (in my oppinion) a difference in team dynamics and
performance.

Important teams I would watch in order of priority:
- Stable security
  There was a security blackout during the summer of 2005, with
  repercussions in the press and public oppinion, hurting the
  project.  
  Since then Moritz was added as a full member to the stable
  security team. Should the transition to common tracking tools,
  a devision between embargoed/unembargoed (vs stable/testing)
  and a more transparent and open work environment continue as it
  seems to present I dont see any need for any outside
  intervention.
  Given the high profile of Debian's security work I will follow
  the unfolding development closely, though.

- Keyring Mainainance
  The only person working on this is very busy. More redundancy
  and a more user-driven attitude could help a lot. I have been
  talking to the keyring maintainer on several occasions last year
  but we have not yet found a way or a candiate to help.
  Ideas? Nominations?

- Debian-System-Administrators
  The working climate in the team is lacking and communication
  internally and externaly can be improved. Some members are
  extremly busy. I would like the team to become able to add new
  manpower itself. I talked with three of the four admins on the
  phone numerous times during last term and would like to see
  change happening from the inside, first. Lacking that I would
  not wait much longer before intervening from the outside. I am
  certain that my election as DPL would help in that regard, as I
  was told before that since I was not DPL myself, I had no
  authority and could not help.

- FTP-Masters
  Transparency has improved and new people have been added.
  FTP-Masters have problems interacting with some other high
  profile, active developers, though.

- Press   
  Debian could do with an active, outgoing press department. I
  look for people with an outgoing personality, time, excellent
  english and experience with press. Packaging skills are less
  important. I would like local sub-departments with tight
  coordination with the "headquarter".
  Just very recently Alexander Schmehl was added to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  That is a good step forward and we will follow closely, as with
  the security team.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions for Jeroen van Wolffelaar and Andreas Schuldei

[Matthew Garrett]

Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I don't think it'd be particularly well-recieved if someone who, after
> all, was not elected, would assume leadership. Regardless of the
> constitutional issues, it was clear that there was some bit of angst
> among DD's during last year's campaigning period about that very issue.

You wouldn't have been assuming leadership of the project in any formal 
manner. However, you've made it clear that you think that the DPL team 
needs leadership - you had the opportunity to provide coordination and 
make sure that things got done, but chose not to. 

> So, concluding, just because I wasn't DPL. Similarly, if you'd elect me,
> you'll get me, and not possibly maybe one of the DPL team members whose
> names I'll announce in a few days. I'll still allow the DPL team members
> to pick up things they want to pick up as far as they can do so without
> special privileges, as they see fit.

But surely the point of a team is for people to be able to pick up the 
slack if someone can't cope? If you believe that the DPL should still be 
a single point of failure, what's the point in electing you?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:38:22AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Anthony Towns  wrote:
> [+2 questions from other people]
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 04:39:52PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Why does it need to happen directly after r2?
> [+3 questions]
> > Uh, what the hell?
> [+2 things that might be answers]
> > This is why I hate trying to talk about things on Debian lists, for
> > reference.
> Do you think list talks might go more smoothly if you seemed not
> to take questions so personally and made clear what answers what?

All the questions seemed designed to be taken personally to me. I'm not
sure why

> > The reason to do it now is to reduce the potential for delays in future.

is insufficient answer to the question you cite.

> Do you think answering "uh, what the hell?" is "being
> courteous to each other on mailing lists"? (from
> http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/platforms/ajt )

I don't see any problem with it, no -- it's not an attack on anyone,
it's just a (strong) expression of bewilderment... I presume you think
otherwise?

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Questions for all candidates: plurality of mandates

[Mohammed Adnène Trojette]

[Don't Cc: me, I read the list]

Questions for all candidates:

In the Debian project, some people run many functions because they are
very competent and have free time to help on many different fronts.

The obvious consequence is a concentration of powers which is dangerous
when those people come to have less free time or interest, as they
become bottlenecks.

I read in Anthony's mail[0]:

"ftpmaster work requires a different set of skills to release management
though, and frankly Joey's already got enough stuff to do, without
worrying about the nuts and bolts of the dak implementation."

[0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/03/msg00157.html

Do you think Debian should *officially* limit the number of delegations
for one person? Do you consider this "multiple hat" question a problem?
If yes, do you have solutions to this problem?

-- 
adn
"One ring to rule them all"
  JRR Tolkien


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[MJ Ray]

Anthony Towns  wrote:
[+2 questions from other people]
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 04:39:52PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Why does it need to happen directly after r2?
[+3 questions]
> 
> Uh, what the hell?
[+2 things that might be answers]
> This is why I hate trying to talk about things on Debian lists, for
> reference.

Do you think list talks might go more smoothly if you seemed not
to take questions so personally and made clear what answers what?

Do you think answering "uh, what the hell?" is "being
courteous to each other on mailing lists"? (from
http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/platforms/ajt )

Curiously,
-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Lars Wirzenius]

ke, 2006-03-08 kello 09:23 +0100, Marc Haber kirjoitti:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:46:53PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:19:19AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > >  Feb 22nd, I mail both Joey (as SRM) and the security team noting the
> > >queue changes that should happen "with a stable update
> > >coming up"
> 
> >From the information publicly available, I conclude that in the last
> four weeks, the SRM has asked for the release to be made possible,
> which has been answered with a request to implement queue changes
> instead of making the release possible.

I didn't understand it like that, that Anthony wanted Joey to implement
the changes, but that Anthony offered to put the changes into effect now
that there was a good chance to do it, rather than waiting for the next
stable point release. Perhaps I misunderstood.

-- 
I think, therefore I am alone in the universe. -- Over the Hedge


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[Bill Allombert]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> The process to expel a developer is described in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/08/msg5.html
> I am not sure whether all expulsion attempts get far enough
> to be recorded on -private or -project as described in
> the process, but DDs can check for traffic on those lists
> involving DPL candidates.  Personally, I find the reasoning
> of delegates slightly more hopeful than a majority vote,
> but the vagueness of it is still unsettling.
> 
> 1. The process "is intended as a last resort" - what steps would
>you take before initiating or supporting it yourself?

I see the removal of a DD as a failure for the whole project.
The first function of a group is to learn to live together. I don't
think Debian would survive a long time to the removal of developers
unless they clearly violated the DMUP.  Once you start playing power
game, the obvious question is, who will be next ?  So I would not
support it myself.

> 2. Do you believe it would be fair to cite someone's non-technical
>socio-religious views in the reasoning for or against expulsion?

I sure hope you are not seriously asking that. 

> 3. Do you think the process should be modified and, if so, how?

The good part of the documented process is that it include provision
for early resolution in case of frivolous recourses to it.
I hope it will never get farther.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 


pgpryFmPUT18l.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Questions for Jeroen van Wolffelaar and Andreas Schuldei

[Enrico Zini]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 11:40:40PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> I think this is a poor response. There were several issues that the DPL 
> team could have dealt with and didn't - it shouldn't have taken access 
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to realise that, for instance, people had concerns over 
> ftp-master communication, consensus within the project, appropriate 
> reactions to anti-social behaviour and so on.

Well, you can't say that I didn't try:
http://people.debian.org/~enrico/dcg/

It just hasn't been marketed as a DPL team effort, because it's mainly
been my work, it started before the DPL team and will continue after it.
But input from being inside the DPL team was indeed useful to bring some
parts of it together.

Actually it hasn't been marketed much at all, since parts of it still
need substantial work.  The parts that are most important to me (like
the 4 main points) are already there, though.


Ciao,

Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Andrew Saunders]

On 3/8/06, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 7. What is your opinion about the current situation with the snapshot
>archive?  Currently it doesn't run on projects assets.

On 12/14/05, Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote [1]:

> actually, NetApp (the storage company) and Intel (the chip
> manufacture) are solving this problem for us. we get a 7 or
> 10Tbyte storage from NetApp and two beefy servers to use as a
> front end for both CD/DVD generation and serving of CDs/DVDs as
> well as the debian meetings archive and other free software.
> Snapshot.d.o would end up on this storage server (cluster?), too.
>
> it will be located in Umeå, Sweden, where we will try to saturate
> the 2Gbits uplink with it. That site is run by the academic
> computer club of the local university, with Michael Wadenstein as
> the local admin.
>
> Thanks again to the sponsors.

Why has this not happened yet? Could we please have an update on this?

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/12/msg00112.html

--
Andrew Saunders

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:45:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:14:21AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > > Uh, what the hell?
> > > You have four people asking basically the same question, and you
> > > wonder about this?
> > 
> > Yes, because _all_ of them leap to the conclusion that I'm trying to delay
> > something, when I'm not.
> 
> Because you are not communicating, and the impression that your
> actions make are that you _are_ delaying.

Please stop this rant. Anthony just showed you how often he communicates,
and you still blame him for that.

Anthony's communication may not fit you, but that's something different.

And since I'm the one who initiated this suggestion (when I said
"postponing the point release"), I didn't meant that Anthony was *trying*
to delay the point release just that he decided to get something done at
the same time, and that apparently Joey didn't understand that relation
and their miscommunication resulted in a delay because Joey didn't
understood that he had to reply to another mail to get the point release
out.

Yes, this could have been avoided with better communication, but we're all
*humans* and we do mistakes.

> Yes, the problem that we have with ftpmaster are not solved by better
> communication. They can probably be mitigated, but frankly, I don't
> see that there is any way to solve the ftpmaster issues with the
> current cast of characters.

So, start working on the issues you have identified and get co-opted.
Jeroen and Joerg are the proof that someone can be coopted by ftpmasters
and do useful work inside it...

I don't think that the "current cast of characters" is the problem. They
certainly fail to be very visible and since Anthony communicates, he should
probably try to communicate in the name of the whole FTP-master team, but
this can probably be solved.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Josselin Mouette]

Le mercredi 08 mars 2006 à 17:45 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> What discussion, exactly? There's a bunch of people telling me how I'm
> blocking the process and deliberately delaying point releases, Joey's
> demanding to be made an ftpmaster, and over what? A single mail that
> didn't get a reply until Joey followed up to it a month later?

Yes. Delays in replying for people at a key position like ftpmaster are
not acceptable.
-- 
 .''`.   Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' :   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Marc Haber]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:46:53PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:19:19AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > > Did you talk to the stable release manager before trying to reduce his
> > > > work load?
> > > Of course I did.
> > In the last four weeks?
> 
> Yes:
> 
> >  Feb 22nd, I mail both Joey (as SRM) and the security team noting the
> >queue changes that should happen "with a stable update
> >coming up"

>From the information publicly available, I conclude that in the last
four weeks, the SRM has asked for the release to be made possible,
which has been answered with a request to implement queue changes
instead of making the release possible.

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:55:35AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Anthony Towns  writes:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:18:32AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> >> After following the thread on here on -vote, I have the impression that
> >> this fixes something that's not a problem - as it doesn't reduce the
> >> work needed to be done by the ftp-team, which seems to be the current
> >> bottleneck.
> > *shrug* I guess you've got a right to your own impression. Mine differs,
> > and I think I've got more to base it on than you do -- or than Joey does
> > for that matter.
> Well, you could start to explain what work is needed for a stable point
> release - it's not really obvious for the average developer who needs to
> do what/how much work to release something. 

The process for doing it on the ftpmaster side is documented in the dak source,
see:

http://cvs.debian.org/*checkout*/dak/docs/README.stable-point-release?root=dak

Joey's side of things you can read about at 

http://people.debian.org/~joey/stable.html

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Marc Haber]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:45:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:14:21AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > Uh, what the hell?
> > You have four people asking basically the same question, and you
> > wonder about this?
> 
> Yes, because _all_ of them leap to the conclusion that I'm trying to delay
> something, when I'm not.

Because you are not communicating, and the impression that your
actions make are that you _are_ delaying.

> > > I sent the mail requesting input and advising the relevant teams of the
> > > changes on the 22nd of Feb to make sure that it _wouldn't_ delay the
> > > update that Joey had previously indicated would be coming at the end of
> > > Feb or early March.
> > Why did you decide not to give Joey the go-ahead for 3.1r2?
> 
> Huh? I haven't decided anything. At present, as announced [0], we're
> about to flick the switch on the the mirror split, which is what's taking
> my focus.

Does this delay implementation of the point release?

> > > This is why I hate trying to talk about things on Debian lists, for
> > > reference.
> > For reference, Debian is a distributed project. Mailing lists are our
> > main means of communication. This discussion is far away from a flame
> > war and it would surely pass any sane code of conduct anybody could
> > impose on us without half of the project retiring.
> 
> What discussion, exactly? There's a bunch of people telling me how I'm
> blocking the process and deliberately delaying point releases, Joey's
> demanding to be made an ftpmaster, and over what? A single mail that
> didn't get a reply until Joey followed up to it a month later?

Yes. People obviously consider this important.

> It's also why I don't think focussing on "reports" or "more communication"
> per se is worth the trouble: I've never once seen it resolve the
> underlying complaints.

Yes, the problem that we have with ftpmaster are not solved by better
communication. They can probably be mitigated, but frankly, I don't
see that there is any way to solve the ftpmaster issues with the
current cast of characters.

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:14:21AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Uh, what the hell?
> You have four people asking basically the same question, and you
> wonder about this?

Yes, because _all_ of them leap to the conclusion that I'm trying to delay
something, when I'm not.

> > I sent the mail requesting input and advising the relevant teams of the
> > changes on the 22nd of Feb to make sure that it _wouldn't_ delay the
> > update that Joey had previously indicated would be coming at the end of
> > Feb or early March.
> Why did you decide not to give Joey the go-ahead for 3.1r2?

Huh? I haven't decided anything. At present, as announced [0], we're
about to flick the switch on the the mirror split, which is what's taking
my focus.

> > This is why I hate trying to talk about things on Debian lists, for
> > reference.
> For reference, Debian is a distributed project. Mailing lists are our
> main means of communication. This discussion is far away from a flame
> war and it would surely pass any sane code of conduct anybody could
> impose on us without half of the project retiring.

What discussion, exactly? There's a bunch of people telling me how I'm
blocking the process and deliberately delaying point releases, Joey's
demanding to be made an ftpmaster, and over what? A single mail that
didn't get a reply until Joey followed up to it a month later?

> If this discussion places an unbearable burden on you, why are you
> running for a job that does require communication, communication, and
> communication instead of finding a position in Debian where you can do
> things where you can excel at, like technical and conceptional stuff,
> without being bothered by those pesky little colleagues who require
> you to actually report about your doings?

Where do you get this stuff? I've been reporting on what I've been doing
in, afaik, more detail than anyone else in the project for the past few
months. See, for instance:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/02/msg7.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/01/msg00011.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/01/msg7.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/01/msg4.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/12/msg00014.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/09/msg2.html

and

http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2006/02/28#2006-02-28-debiantech
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2006/02/20#2006-02-20-debbugs-bzr
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/12/21#2005-12-21-newamber
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/12/12#2005-12-12-impl1
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/12/11#2005-12-11-waiting-on-dsa
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/12/06#2005-12-06-detailed-sec-plan
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/11/26#2005-11-26-queuebuild
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/11/26#2005-11-26-niv2
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/11/17#2005-11-17-q-unapproved
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/11/16#2005-11-16-dak
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/11/06#2005-11-06-memoryleaks
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/10/26#2005-10-26-bugfixing
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/10/16#2005-10-16-tiffani
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/10/10#2005-10-10-usercategories
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/09/23#2005-09-23-debiantech

And yes, doing all that, and then getting told that I should "instead
[find] a position in Debian where [I] can do things [...] without being
bothered by those pesky little colleagues who require you to actually
report about your doing" remains exactly what I hate about Debian lists.

It's also why I don't think focussing on "reports" or "more communication"
per se is worth the trouble: I've never once seen it resolve the
underlying complaints.
  
Cheers,
aj

[0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/02/msg7.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mirrors-announce/2006/02/msg0.html



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 07:57:18AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > *shrug* I guess you've got a right to your own impression. Mine differs,
> > and I think I've got more to base it on than you do -- or than Joey does
> > for that matter. What do you want me to say?
> Which if course is a valid argument if and only if you are willing to share 
> your insights. 

That's why I posted http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/03/msg00147.html .

The blog post linked from there goes into a little detail about what
that means for ftpmaster when a point release happens.

I'm just not seeing what more there is to be said -- I think it will
reduces the workload, as well as the other benefits, Marc doesn't. The
natural course of action seems to me to be try it and see -- if it
doesn't work we think up other ideas next time.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:19:19AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > Did you talk to the stable release manager before trying to reduce his
> > > work load?
> > Of course I did.
> In the last four weeks?

Yes:

>  Feb 22nd, I mail both Joey (as SRM) and the security team noting the
>queue changes that should happen "with a stable update
>coming up"

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Request to be approved as FTP-Master]

[David N. Welton]

Martin Schulze wrote:

>>Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea.

> This has been rejected by James Troup.

He's against the flying part, or giving pigs enough thrust?  I for one
don't feel it's the sort of activity, entertaining though it might be,
that Debian should be involved in - it should definitely be left to Gentoo.

-- 
David N. Welton
- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/

Linux, Open Source Consulting
- http://www.dedasys.com/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]