Re: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[Lars Wirzenius]

pe, 2006-03-10 kello 02:52 +, MJ Ray kirjoitti:
> Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Do you believe that anyone in Debian has ever been discriminated against 
> > for socio-religious views that had no impact on their ability to work in 
> > the project?
> 
> Given the number of people in Debian, it seems probable that
> one will have experienced religious discrimination unconnected
> with their debian work at some point in their life. I don't
> see how that's on-topic for -vote, though.

A masterful evasion. The context was clearly discrimination in a Debian
context. Please answer again.

-- 
i++; /* TODO: make this pre-increment - more efficient */


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

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

[James Troup]

Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.08.0853 +0100]:
>> > This has been rejected by James Troup.
>> 
>> What was the reason?
>
> No reason given.

Err, I don't think that's fair.  Here's the relevant portion of my email:

| > I hereby request to be approved as FTP-master with proper permissions
| > in order to be able to fully prepare and release stable updates.  My
| > plan is to only touch stable update stuff and not work on any other
| > corner of ftpmastership.
| 
| Sorry, but, no.
| 
| The problem with the current point release is sudo.  If you want the
| point release to happen, please work with the sudo maintainer or
| convince someone to work with the sudo maintainer to get the package
| into a state where he is happy for it to be released.

The implication is that the reason for turning down the request was
that the point release was not being blocked by lack of an available
ftp-master, so making Joey one seemed orthogonal to the actual goal of
getting the next point release out.

If that wasn't clear, I apologise.

I should also mention that it became clear later in the same mail
conversation/thread that Joey wasn't aware that sudo was the blocker.
I had gotten the impression (or misapprehension, perhaps) from talking
to Bdale that the security team were aware of its problems and they
were actively discussing solutions.  I also thought a couple of us had
pinged either Bdale or the security team (or both) about this issue
before now.  And of course, there's the pile of critical bugs open on
sudo about the issue.  But I never personally replied to Joey's mail
about the next point release explicitly saying that fixing sudo was a
pre-depends, and I apologise for that.

-- 
James


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

Re: Questions for all candidates: plurality of mandates

[Steve McIntyre]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 11:45:44AM +0100, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
>
>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?

No, I don't think an official limit on jobs is necessary, nor would it
help. I agree that we _do_ have a problem with the "multiple hat"
issue, and I know we also have a related issue: finding people to pick
up all the big tasks that need doing.

Debian has a long history of causing burnout in key people: the bigger
tasks often need such a commitment that they quickly cease to be
fun. Then we see those key people simply dropping out of the
project. Many of the tasks end up being allocated almost by guilt: the
feeling that "if I don't do the job, it won't get done". And the more
work that people do for Debian, the more they will see these tasks
that have to be done.

Some solutions to these issues are easy to suggest, but not so easy to
make happen:

 * More people volunteering to work on core tasks. Not just saying
   "let me in", but actually diving in and learning how things work
   and making a start.

 * More information about what tasks need help - prioritising tasks
   and working out where people _can_ dive in effectively.

What doesn't help is adding extra pressure on the people doing the
core tasks. Some of the periodic mailing list discussions have turned
ugly on this front. Abusing / criticising the dedicated workaholics
only makes the situation worse - it won't make them work any faster,
and it won't encourage them to go looking for help.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Further comment on how I feel about IBM will appear once I've worked out
 whether they're being malicious or incompetent. Capital letters are forecast."
 Matthew Garrett, http://www.livejournal.com/users/mjg59/30675.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

(For SteveM) Re: Questions for all candidates about developer behavior and abuse

[Ted Walther]

On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:00:22AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:

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 (key removed from keyring, alioth account
disabled, and blacklisted from mailing lists and the bts)?  As DPL,
how would you go about the process of removing a Developer from the
project (both the public, official process, as well as any
private/unofficial processes).


Removal of a DD should only be a last resort for damaging behaviour.


Steve, why don't you lead us out of the dark here.  Give us some
examples of what you consider to be the most likely instances "damaging
behavior".  Be explicit, and don't leave any details to the imagination.

Ted

--
 It's not true unless it makes you laugh,   
but you don't understand it until it makes you weep.


Eukleia: Ted Walther
Address: 5690 Pioneer Ave, Burnaby, BC  V5H2X6 (Canada)
Contact: 604-430-4973


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[MJ Ray]

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Do you believe that anyone in Debian has ever been discriminated against 
> for socio-religious views that had no impact on their ability to work in 
> the project?

Given the number of people in Debian, it seems probable that
one will have experienced religious discrimination unconnected
with their debian work at some point in their life. I don't
see how that's on-topic for -vote, though.

-- 
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: PROPOSAL: Additional yearly voting ritual

[Ean Schuessler]

No match for "DEBIANSURVIVOR.COM"!

On Thursday 09 March 2006 08:12 pm, Ari Pollak wrote:
> Yeah! It should be like Survivor, only with less excitement and more
> flaming! This is a great idea, Ean! Please tell us more! Look how many
> exclamation marks I am using!

-- 
Ean Schuessler, CTO
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com


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

Re: PROPOSAL: Additional yearly voting ritual

[Ari Pollak]

Yeah! It should be like Survivor, only with less excitement and more 
flaming! This is a great idea, Ean! Please tell us more! Look how many 
exclamation marks I am using!


Ari!


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

Re: Question to all candidates about the NM process

[Steve McIntyre]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:12:00AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:06:37PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> 2. Asks for too broad knowledge
>>
>> It has been suggested several times over the years that we ask too
>> many questions of NM candidates. People want to do work for Debian,
>> but not everybody needs to know the gory details of library symbol
>> versioning (for example) if their interests and skills lie in
>> translation. So far, our organisation has been tailored for a group of
>> package maintainers, _not_ translators or sysadmins or artists or ...
>
>Actually, we have special NM templates for people who are interested in
>working on documentation and translation.

Oops; I'm slightly out-of-date on that front then.

>But this leaves the problem if a translator or artist really needs to
>have all rights a DDs has, including shells on Debian hosts, upload
>permissions and other, potentially security-relevant stuff. Do we need
>to hand out real accounts to people who don't need them, or should we
>add new titles to allow them to identify with Debian ("Debian
>Translator", for example)?

That's an awkward question to answer, and I've been involved in
debates on it several times already over the last couple of years. We
need to work this out as a project; this may take quite some time
yet...

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Every time you use Tcl, God kills a kitten." -- Malcolm Ray


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Questions for all candidates about developer behavior and abuse

[Steve McIntyre]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 04:53:40PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>Hi,
>
>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 (key removed from keyring, alioth account disabled, and
>blacklisted from mailing lists and the bts)?  As DPL, how would you go
>about the process of removing a Developer from the project (both the
>public, official process, as well as any private/unofficial processes).

Removal of a DD should only be a last resort for damaging
behaviour. Efforts must be taken first to try and repair any damage by
normal means: negotiating an apology and/or promises of better future
behaviour. Only after repeated trouble should the expulsion process
even be considered.

I'd be prepared to start or support the official process of expulsion
if I believed it to be necessary, but that does not need any special
DPL powers.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of
 course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell." -- Linus Torvalds


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[Steve McIntyre]

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 would need to convince myself of two things:

 * that the project as a whole would be clearly better off without
   that developer, due to their behaviour

 * that the developer was fully aware of the behaviour in question and
   had no intention of changing that behaviour

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

In my opinion, the expulsion process should depend entirely on
_behaviour_ rather than "non-technical socio-religious views". We are
clearly not in the business of controlling the personal opinions of
developers. Only in extreme cases of damaging _behaviour_ should we
even consider expulsion.

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

I'm personally satisfied with the process as it stands; I don't see
any major flaws. Would you modify it yourself?

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Mature Sporty Personal
  More Innovation More Adult
  A Man in Dandism
  Powered Midship Specialty


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

PROPOSAL: Additional yearly voting ritual

[Ean Schuessler]

My Dear Fellow Developers,

I would like to propose a new voting routine as an adjunct (or perhaps replacement) to the DPL race. I propose we allow Developers to nominate one and another (or perhaps themselves) for elimination from the project. Winners would have their membership in the Debian project revoked and be expelled in a public manner that induces remaining developers to maintain a pleasant working relationship. Naturally, this contest would be judged by the usual Condorcet method.

Each Developer would be limited to a maximum of one nomination per year and could require a minimum nomination count to qualify (ie. sqrt(#devel) / 4). Each Developer nominated for expulsion could optionally provide a platform about why they should or should not be eliminated.

The contest should have at least one winner for dramatic effect. The most Condorcet oriented method would be to expel all the nominees that do not defeat the option "I Really Couldn't Care Less".

This approach would create an open, egalitarian and democratic method for expelling undesirable marginal elements (such as myself) from the project. In the spirit of teamwork I hope you will all give my idea some consideration and forward me any feedback.

With very pleasant regards and in fellowship towards the greater good,
~E

-- 
Ean Schuessler, CTO
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com

Ted Walther interview

[Aigars Mahinovs]

Hi all,

I did an interview with Ted Walther on my blog that you might find interesting:
http://www.aigarius.com/2006/03/10/interview-with-ted.html

Warning: it is very long and is basically a subjective portrayal of
another subjective position.
Note: I am not subscribed to debian-vote, so please CC me on replies
if you want me to read them.
--
Best regards,
Aigars Mahinovsmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 #--#
  | .''`. Debian GNU/Linux  LAKA |
 |: :' :  http://www.debian.org  &  http://www.laka.lv  |
 |`. `' |
 |  `-   |
 #--#

Re: Final call for votes for the GFDL position statement

[Duck]

> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 25a628e9-d88e-40b7-8e1c-888cff421ea5
> [ 3 ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases
> [ 1 ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free
> [   ] Choice 3: GFDL-licensed works are compatible with the DFSG [needs 3:1]
> [ 2 ] Choice 4: Further discussion
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

-- 
Marc Dequènes (Duck)


pgpUjQt3ZXu8w.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Final call for votes for the GFDL position statement

[brad]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

 > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 > 25a628e9-d88e-40b7-8e1c-888cff421ea5
 > [ 4  ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases
 > [ 2  ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free
 > [ 1  ] Choice 3: GFDL-licensed works are compatible with the DFSG [needs 3:1]
 > [ 3  ] Choice 4: Further discussion
 > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iQCVAwUBRBC6GflGAd2fVpdNAQIdkAQAgqnzYqd4F4jdrVXPiufHcQs6VKSfGQch
HQIUwa7iAfUEvNw+CMkfBpV062qP37ozY7ySi5IN+pGVT8yQwxZeUgXv+jgfvBYr
4Cy1aP0wLTpR0bE+X1/nIAAFfDi20lEbEasy3JSOu1fdSU4r7cwIcMvoPIMrLLyD
mEW+8E8kzEQ=
=14tv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Draft ballot for the debian project leader election 2006

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

This is just a draft. If you vote, your ballot shall bounce.
 The vote key is valid, though. The order of the candidates on the
 ballot is the same as on the http://vote.debian.org/2006/vote_002
 page -- which is the order their nomination mails came into my
 Inbox.

manoj

 Votinge period starts 00:00:01 UTC on March 19th, 2006.
 Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on April  8th, 2006.

This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.
For voting questions contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The details of the candidate platforms can be found at:
http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/platforms/

HOW TO VOTE

First, read the full text of the platforms and rebuttals..

Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the
choice names.

In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till you reach your
last choice. Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 8.
You may skip numbers.  You may rank options equally (as long as all
choices X you make fall in the range 1<= X <= 8).

Make sure you have read the platforms in detail.

To vote "no, no matter what" rank "None Of The Above" as more
desirable than the unacceptable choices, or You may rank the "None Of
The Above" choice, and leave choices you consider unacceptable
blank. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
choices, and ranked below all ranked choices. (Note: if the None Of
The Above choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other unranked
choices, if any -- no special consideration is given to the None Of
The Above choice by the voting software).

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 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
52717dc0-26e3-4337-a88b-cc2c260fcb51
[   ] Choice 1: Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[   ] Choice 2: Ari Pollak
[   ] Choice 3: Steve McIntyre
[   ] Choice 4: Anthony Towns
[   ] Choice 5: Andreas Schuldei
[   ] Choice 6: Jonathan Walther
[   ] Choice 7: Bill Allombert
[   ] Choice 8: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

--

The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created
for this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project
secretary, is appended below.

-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
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=fHww
-END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-

-- 
A city is a large community where people are lonesome together Herbert
Prochnow
Manoj Srivastava   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


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

Final call for votes for the GFDL position statement

[Debian Project Secretary]

Hi,

At the time of writing, about two days left in the vote, 269
 people have voted, out of a potential 972.

 As you can see, we are still well shy of the 50% mark. If you have
 been waiting for the last minute to cast your vote, this is it. I
 would not advice waiting for the 11th hour, since mistakes happen:
 people forget to sign their ballot, send it to the wrong address, or
 have problems with their MUA mangling the ballot; leave it too late
 and you shall not have time to correct the error. BTW, the most
 common cause of a rejected ballot is people forgetting to sign
 it. This close to the deadline, those of you who haven't yet voted
 can't afford to take chances. Sign the ballot!.


So, if you have not yet voted, go vote.

manoj

 Voting period starts 00:00:01 UTC on Sunday,   26th February,  2006
 Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Saturday, 11th March, 2006.

The following ballot is for voting on a General Resolution to address
the Debian project's position on the GNU Free Documentation License.
The vote is being conducted in accordance with the policy delineated
in Section A, Standard Resolution Procedure, of the Debian
Constitution.

The details of the general resolution can be found at:
http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001

You may see the constitution at http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.
For voting questions contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

HOW TO VOTE

First, read the full text of the GR and amendments. The ballot does
not claim to be complete rendition of the proposals, or even
accurately depict the spirit of each proposal.

Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the
choice names.

In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till you reach your
last choice. Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 4.
You may skip numbers.  You may rank options equally (as long as all
choices X you make fall in the range 1<= X <= 4).

Make sure you have read the proposals in detail.

To vote "no, no matter what" rank "Further discussion" as more
desirable than the unacceptable choices, or You may rank the "Further
discussion" choice, and leave choices you consider unacceptable
blank. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
choices, and ranked below all ranked choices. (Note: if the Further
Discussion choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other unranked
choices, if any -- no special consideration is given to the Further
discussion choice by the voting software).

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
[   ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free
[   ] Choice 3: GFDL-licensed works are compatible with the DFSG [needs 3:1]
[   ] Choice 4: Further discussion
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


--

The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created
for this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project
secretary, is appended below.

-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
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Re: question for all candidates

[Matthew Garrett]

Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-07 20:09:11]:
>> 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.

Last November, you and the DPL team wanted to propose a GR that would 
have forcibly made everyone in a position of authority a formal 
delegate, and stated that you had replacements ready if they were 
unwilling to comply.

1) You now appear less willing to do so. What has changed?

2) At the time you said that you had new ftp-masters and a new security 
team ready to replace the existing ones. Does this mean that you already 
have good additional people that could (in your opinion) make a 
difference in team dynamics and performance?

3) You have previously claimed that new people were formally delegated 
to the security team during the past year. This was never announced on 
debian-devel-announce, and these delegations were never posted on 
http://www.debian.org/intro/organization . If you were unable to 
successfully add people to teams then, why do you believe you would be 
able to do so during your time as DPL?

4) You were planning to propose a GR that would have made the
ftp-masters formal delegates. However, at the time you had not actually
raised this with the ftp-masters. How does this fit with your desire for 
the project to be more open and communicative?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Jutta Wrage]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


Am 08.03.2006 um 15:34 schrieb Andreas Schuldei:


- Stable security
  There was a security blackout during the summer of 2005, with
  repercussions in the press and public oppinion, hurting the
  project.


Shouldn't it be more: Looking that there will be no new release  
without security support for it up and running? Security support for  
Sarge was not the only problem, when Sarge was released...


greetings

Jutta

- -- 
http://www.witch.westfalen.de

http://witch.muensterland.org

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkQQimIACgkQOgZ5N97kHkc3ywCfciTShC1Ohb+GooQFV/cm3MlK
j5YAn06JqRMUjjrAVaoRE4l78Oi0byJN
=VO1l
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: Questions to candidate Anthony Towns

[Anthony Towns]

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 05:45:27PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> At the time you seemed to defend your decision really aggressively[1],
> although the GR 2004-003 disagreed with your interpretation of the effect 
> of Editorial amendments GR to sarge.

2004-001 was the DPL election; -002 was non-free; -003 was the editorial
amendments; -004 was the release schedule in view of -003. If you mean
-004 by the above, I don't see how it disagreed with my interpretation;
the result was:

   The Debian Project,

   affirming its commitment to principles of freeness for all works
   it distributes,

   but recognizing that changing the Social Contract today would have
   grave consequences for the upcoming stable release, a fact which does
   not serve our goals or the interests of our users,

   hereby resolves:

   1. that the amendments to the Social Contract contained within the
   General Resolution Editorial Amendments To The Social Contract (2004
   vote 003) be immediately rescinded;

   2. that these amendments, which have already been ratified by the
   Debian Project, will be reinstated immediately after the release of the
   next stable version of Debian, without further cause for deliberation.

If you didn't mean to say GR 2004-004, I don't know what you mean.

> Looking backwards, do think your decission to implement the GR immeadetly 
> even thou sarge was already 4 month late was a mistake? 

I don't think it was my decision at all; I think I was bound by the social
contract to act as I did. I invited the technical committee to overrule
my actions, and the developer body as a whole had the opportunity to do
so by GR. Neither did so.

I should also note that all I did was make a post to -devel; nothing in
the archive changed while that debate was underway, and as a consequence
of the follow-on vote, the GR remained unimplemented until after sarge's
release. You might reasonably argue it's still not implemented now,
pending a resolution on the GFDL topic.

> What do you think
> you have learned from the whole episode? How would you avoid similar
> escalation patterns in future?

I did not believe then, and I don't believe now that any single
individual should be held either solely or primarily responsible for
that -- and that presumption was precisely what offended me in the mail
you cite. 

However, some things that could be done differently that would have avoided
the conflict:

* having GR proposers clearly indicate what they think the outcome of
  the resolution should be, before the vote

* having the DPL or secretary invite developers to comment on how
  a given GR would change the way they operate (if at all), and
  include that in the summary pages

* having the technical committee and the DPL comment able to comment on
  controversial issues promptly, to either support the actions taken, or
  take responsibility for changing them

But really, if you want to have a say in the project via elections,
the question has to be turned around to the voters: if you're unhappy
with the result, what have *you* as a voter learned from it, and what
are *you* going to do in future?

Personally, I expect I'll try to make sure that on any vote there's an
option that interests me that I'll want to vote above further discussion.

> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/04/msg02074.html

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about the NM process

[Gaudenz Steinlin]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:12:00AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:06:37PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> > 2. Asks for too broad knowledge
> >
> > It has been suggested several times over the years that we ask too
> > many questions of NM candidates. People want to do work for Debian,
> > but not everybody needs to know the gory details of library symbol
> > versioning (for example) if their interests and skills lie in
> > translation. So far, our organisation has been tailored for a group of
> > package maintainers, _not_ translators or sysadmins or artists or ...
> 
> Actually, we have special NM templates for people who are interested in
> working on documentation and translation.
> 
> But this leaves the problem if a translator or artist really needs to
> have all rights a DDs has, including shells on Debian hosts, upload
> permissions and other, potentially security-relevant stuff. Do we need
> to hand out real accounts to people who don't need them, or should we
> add new titles to allow them to identify with Debian ("Debian
> Translator", for example)?

And give them voting privileges, of course after they did some
significant work for Debian and proper ID and maybe P&P checks. 

IMO we should separate the security relevant stuff that needs thorough
technical skills from the other DD privileges.

Gaudenz

-- 
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.
Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
~ Samuel Beckett ~


pgp1Bjg38a20C.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Questions to candidate Anthony Towns

[Riku Voipio]

On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:19:09PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The reason I stepped down as release manager wasn't because of any
> accusations per se, but rather because I felt that I lacked support
> in continuing to act as release manager. That impression was built up
> both by the level of disgruntlement from both sides of the debate [1],
> and the lack of interest in either supporting my actions in response
> to the changes, or overruling them by either the DPL or the technical
> committee [2]. That this was then followed up by a proposal for a GR to
> force amd64 not only into the archive but also into sarge convinced me
> that I wasn't likely to be able to much good in continuing.

At the time you seemed to defend your decision really aggressively[1],
although the GR 2004-003 disagreed with your interpretation of the effect 
of Editorial amendments GR to sarge.

Looking backwards, do think your decission to implement the GR immeadetly 
even thou sarge was already 4 month late was a mistake? What do you think
you have learned from the whole episode? How would you avoid similar
escalation patterns in future?

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/04/msg02074.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/04/msg01929.html


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

Re: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[Matthew Garrett]

Majid Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
>> > 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.
> 
> Sadly, events last month make me entirely serious about it.
> Do you believe it would be fair?

Do you believe that anyone in Debian has ever been discriminated against 
for socio-religious views that had no impact on their ability to work in 
the project?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

[Moving this to -devel, please reply only there, this is not really
voting related stuff. We are talking about things to improve keyring
maintenance, for those not reading -vote.]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> So first one was the spam problem, keyring-maint is a well-known address,
> and mails that are meant to go to it could be in all sorts of weird
> formats. There's already magic debian.org handling that'll drop stuff
> without a pseudo-header in the mail (for [EMAIL PROTECTED]), or without
> a specific tag in the subject which should mostly solve the problem,
> which mostly requires working out some tags/headers and making sure all
> the appropriate documentation is updated.

Could these mails be required to have a valid GPG signature (either
for a key in a public keyserver or a DD key)? This would eliminate the
spam problem (almost) entirely.

> The third thing was to develop some new scripts to manage
> debian-keyring.gpg in a more componentised manner -- rather than
> one huge blob, have many small files that are independently auditable
> (this is the key for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", it's authorised because it came
> via [EMAIL PROTECTED] after blah lost their key in a tragic accident
> involving a watermelon, it's signed by foo and bar...). The scripts
> to manage all this have to be simple, obviously correct and secure,
> and also fast enough to be usable.

I think I could at least try to tackle this, as this doesn't need
anything special. If somebody else is already working on this, I would
appreciate a heads-up :)

> Apparently there's been some mention of this on -private; I'm not
> sure when.

I recall some discussion, yes.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Anthony Towns]

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:35:05AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Mar 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > 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.
> Could this mail (or the practical upshot of it) be made public?

I'll leaving posting the mail itself to Branden or James if they chose,
since I only had a copy to comment on any wording that wasn't clear.

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 11:47:18AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> What would these three things be? I might be interested in tackling
> some of them.

So first one was the spam problem, keyring-maint is a well-known address,
and mails that are meant to go to it could be in all sorts of weird
formats. There's already magic debian.org handling that'll drop stuff
without a pseudo-header in the mail (for [EMAIL PROTECTED]), or without
a specific tag in the subject which should mostly solve the problem,
which mostly requires working out some tags/headers and making sure all
the appropriate documentation is updated.

The second was to get rt setup to, uh, track requests -- it's waiting
on the first thing (since rt sends auto-replies, and auto-replies to
spam is bad, mmmkay), and possibly also lacks a debian.org machine that can
be its host.

The third thing was to develop some new scripts to manage
debian-keyring.gpg in a more componentised manner -- rather than
one huge blob, have many small files that are independently auditable
(this is the key for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", it's authorised because it came
via [EMAIL PROTECTED] after blah lost their key in a tragic accident
involving a watermelon, it's signed by foo and bar...). The scripts
to manage all this have to be simple, obviously correct and secure,
and also fast enough to be usable.

Apparently there's been some mention of this on -private; I'm not
sure when.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

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

[Martin Schulze]

martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.08.0853 +0100]:
> > This has been rejected by James Troup.
> 
> What was the reason?

No reason given.

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

[Sven Luther]

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 12:54:54PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:31:49AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > > 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?
> > 
> > The three quad-power5 machines that IBM donated to debian for powerpc64 
> > work,
> > and nobody knew about, and are now sitting in augsbourg  (1 used by the
> > augsbourg university, and two maintained by Bastian Blank, who distribute
> > accounts on it).
> 
> Are bruckner and voltaire overloaded or do they lack services the developers
> need?

The release team has called for a multi-arch implementation to support
powerpc64 userland over the biarch situation. This calls for a machine capable
of building *and running* powerpc 64 code, which is not the case of existing
powerpc 32bit machines.

> Another question would be if the Debian project should accept every
> arbitrary donation and increase their machine pool even when there
> is no use the machine?

We plan to support powerpc64 userland for etch, as thus this is necessary.
Furthermore these machines could be used for other use than just development,
but then, i guess it is preferable to get a donation from intel than get a
donation from ibm ?

> > It was my believe that at least one of them should be maintained under the
> > umbrella of the DSA team, in order to have it thrusted to be used to upload
> > packages, but the DSA team refused to have anything to do with them, which i
> > suppose is understandable since they have no time for it. I proposed to 
> > handle
> > it for them though, or have Bastian do so, and was equally refused.
> 
> I've once told you that currently (one year ago or so) there is no
> use for them, since a) voltaire works fine as buildd and bruckner
> works fine as developer machine.

sure, but we need a powerpc64 autobuilder for etch.

> > This is no blame, or something, i can clearly understand your
> > frustration and that i may not have asked at the right time or something, 
> > just
> > the machines are mostly underused, which is a shame, they are fast, have 
> > good
> > memory, disks and bandwidth, and even the licences for the virtual 
> > partitions
> > allowing to create sub machines for different usages.
> 
> Well, they haven't been negotiated with leader, hardware-donations, ports
> or debian-admin prior to the donation.  What do you expect?  When I donate

Sure, i didn't want to go into this, but this was because of some real
communication fuck-up during martin's term. I remember martin going to IBM
asking for donation of 64bit powerpc hardware, and myself also contacted them 
back
much later, and being told "but we donated already so many machines to debian" 
:)

> you a pencil while you're perfectly fine with your old pencil and the new
> one doesn't provide anything better, you won't use it either.

Sure, but this is not the case here.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-- 
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

[Martin Schulze]

Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:31:49AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > 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?
> 
> The three quad-power5 machines that IBM donated to debian for powerpc64 work,
> and nobody knew about, and are now sitting in augsbourg  (1 used by the
> augsbourg university, and two maintained by Bastian Blank, who distribute
> accounts on it).

Are bruckner and voltaire overloaded or do they lack services the developers
need?

Another question would be if the Debian project should accept every
arbitrary donation and increase their machine pool even when there
is no use the machine?

> It was my believe that at least one of them should be maintained under the
> umbrella of the DSA team, in order to have it thrusted to be used to upload
> packages, but the DSA team refused to have anything to do with them, which i
> suppose is understandable since they have no time for it. I proposed to handle
> it for them though, or have Bastian do so, and was equally refused.

I've once told you that currently (one year ago or so) there is no
use for them, since a) voltaire works fine as buildd and bruckner
works fine as developer machine.

> This is no blame, or something, i can clearly understand your
> frustration and that i may not have asked at the right time or something, just
> the machines are mostly underused, which is a shame, they are fast, have good
> memory, disks and bandwidth, and even the licences for the virtual partitions
> allowing to create sub machines for different usages.

Well, they haven't been negotiated with leader, hardware-donations, ports
or debian-admin prior to the donation.  What do you expect?  When I donate
you a pencil while you're perfectly fine with your old pencil and the new
one doesn't provide anything better, you won't use it either.

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

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.03.08.0853 +0100]:
> This has been rejected by James Troup.

What was the reason?

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP (sub)keys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"on the other hand, with the advent of msvc 5, i can claim i use
 emacs because it's smaller and more efficient." :-)"
-- darin johnson


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)

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

[Sven Luther]

On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:31:49AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Bill Allombert wrote:
> > 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?

The three quad-power5 machines that IBM donated to debian for powerpc64 work,
and nobody knew about, and are now sitting in augsbourg  (1 used by the
augsbourg university, and two maintained by Bastian Blank, who distribute
accounts on it).

It was my believe that at least one of them should be maintained under the
umbrella of the DSA team, in order to have it thrusted to be used to upload
packages, but the DSA team refused to have anything to do with them, which i
suppose is understandable since they have no time for it. I proposed to handle
it for them though, or have Bastian do so, and was equally refused.

This is no blame, or something, i can clearly understand your
frustration and that i may not have asked at the right time or something, just
the machines are mostly underused, which is a shame, they are fast, have good
memory, disks and bandwidth, and even the licences for the virtual partitions
allowing to create sub machines for different usages.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


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

Re: Code of conduct, question to all candidates

[MJ Ray]

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (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)

Your opinion is:
a. Wrong
b. Broadly irrelevant
c. Wrong

(I don't disagree with Matthew Garrett's main point, but I
am sick of people who behave in an anti-social manner towards
several others then complaining about other people behaving in an
anti-social manner. You're all wrong. Erm. ;-/ I hope all readers
appreciate this satire, else mail me off-list for explanation.)

-- 
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: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[MJ Ray]

Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > 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.

Sadly, events last month make me entirely serious about it.
Do you believe it would be fair?

Thanks,
-- 
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: Candidate questions: expulsions process

[MJ Ray]

Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > 1. The process "is intended as a last resort" - what steps would
> >you take before initiating or supporting it yourself?
> 
> [...] As such, I would also want to ensure that there has been enough
> effort done to ensure that the person in question is made aware of the
> problematic behaviour, and was hence given a chance to seize such
> behaviour.

Can you suggest what you see as "enough effort"? Does it include
posting a message on a charity's web site flaming a person?
(Two candidates participated in www.pledgebank.com/killfileandrew )

Thank you for your full frank answers. I'm disappointed that
some other candidates seem not to share your prompt openness.

Best wishes,
-- 
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 for all candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> 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;

What would these three things be? I might be interested in tackling
some of them.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Don Armstrong]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> 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.

Could this mail (or the practical upshot of it) be made public?

[I've personally been interested in developing something along these
lines to deal with controlling the public keyrings that I seem to have
strewn througout mulitple machines, and it seems reasonable to attack
both issues at once, assuming I ever get time to do this.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
"Ban cryptography! Yes. Let's also ban pencils, pens and paper, since
criminals can use them to draw plans of the joint they are casing or
even, god forbid, create one time pads to pass uncrackable codes to
each other. Ban open spaces since criminals could use them to converse
with each other out of earshot of the police. Let's ban flags since
they could be used to pass secret messages in semaphore. In fact let's
just ban all forms of verbal and non-verbal communication -- let's see
those criminals make plans now!"

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


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Martin Schulze]

Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> * 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.  

Err... you know that this was caused by disfunctional infrastructure
not maintained by the security team, right?

> - 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.

Good input for the press team is always good - yet only very seldom
provided.

Regards,

Joey

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