Question to the candidates
As a developer, how do you embody the spirit and culture that has made Debian a great operating system? If elected DPL, how will you inspire the same in others? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?
Hi! The following question is optional, as it discloses private information, so feel free not to answer it. But non the less, I'm curious and would appreciate, if you would be willing to answer. So here it goes: Suppose that you would not run for DPL: Who would you vote and why? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ba9c8c7.6050...@schmehl.info
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
Our users includes not only an individual with a single computer who never sees the source, but also derivative distributions, private organizations, system administrators, etc, all of whom may need to modify the source for their own purposes. Our users, if they want to modify, study, redistribute or use after rebuild our system, need the source. At no moment these operations involve modifying a RFC or a binary program that is aimed at run on a Windows system. I conclude that that kind of file, although present in our source packages, are not part of the source of our operating system. *cough* (My first thought was *WAYS* more impolite.) So, you want to make Debian unfit to be distributed by anyone. You seriously consider distributing undistributable files just because you are too lazy to do your maintainers work. You seriously want to put all our mirrors, all or CD distributors AND ALL OUR USERS at risk to break laws and maybe get sued (some of our users definitely are large enough to be a nice target for law trolls), just because you fucking dont want to do the work? I think that we should have the possibility to redistribute a bit-identical upstream archive when possible. Thats possible whenever upstream has fixed his tarball to not include non-free bits. repacked tarballes, we can do with pristine ones. If we do not trust each other that a couple of useless non-DFSG-free files can be ignored, what else can't we trust ? You. -- bye, Joerg You know, boys, a nuclear reactor is a lot like a woman. You just have to read the manual and press the right buttons. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sk7qku6t@gkar.ganneff.de
Re: Q for the Candidates: How many users?
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [100323 01:47]: AJ's question, and particularly his other longer response to the question about disappearing DPLs, really highlight what I think are some disagreements between he and I about how we see Debian. I fundamentally do not believe in the grow or die model or think that projects need to constantly move on to the next shiny thing. I need to disagree a bit: I believe in grow or die, but grow doesn't need to be in quantity. So, if we get better and better (and our tools easier to work with, etc) we also grow but in quality. (And if I compare squeeze with sarge I can see lots of differences where looking back I always think oh, this obviously was quite painful.) (Of course, this supports everything else you said.) Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324083715.go19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Q for the Candidates: How many users?
* Stefano Zacchiroli (z...@debian.org) [100322 21:50]: All in all, this is probably a topic where a quick and easy devotee-based poll might show where the DD body stands in the trade-off between the advantages and disadvantages of enabling popcon submissions by default, and finally get this discussion past us. JFTR, I don't think that a quick and easy poll is always a sufficient way to resolve issues. I think one of the strength of Debian is that we try to analyze the situation before we do a decision. Which has the advantage that we could usually uphold our decisions because they are well thought. (And the disadvantage that some people don't understand that speaking and thinking things over needs time. Somehow thinking things over in a good way doesn't match the way the media tell us how it shold be.) Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324084717.gp19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Question to all (other) candidates
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 06:49:51PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
So, since part of the reason that I joined the race was to make sure it
wouldn't get too boring, I was hoping there'd be a bit more life on this
list. Since there isn't, allow me to ask a few questions myself.
FWIW, I disagree with that or, better, I think too boring is a
subjective notion. I've been indexing DPL campaigning questions this and
last year, and we're currently at about 20 discussion topics, with 1
more week of campaigning ahead of us. Last year campaigning has been
*way* more quiet :-)
(The alert reader will notice that some of the points in this mail have
not been mentioned in my rebuttals. This is because these are
*questions*, not statements of what I believe is wrong; the latter
belong in rebuttals, the former do not)
Oh, thanks, I've discovered from this that your rebuttals have been
published already on www.d.o. Mine are still not (the fault is all mine
though: I've sent them to the secretary after the suggested deadline),
but are available since yesterday on my homepage
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/hacking/debian/dpl-2010/platform.html#sec:rebuttals
... and while we are on rebuttals, let me comment a specific point of
your rebuttals to my platform: the one about the website. Reading your
rebuttals, it seems that I intend to favor external over internal
contributions to the website. This is not the case, as it is made clear
by the usage of the expression emergency plan.
Now, since fair is fair, I'm looking forward for your comments to my
rebuttals about your platform :-)
Stefano:
You make a point of transparency and availability in your platform. As
you yourself note, many past DPLs and DPL candidates have made similar
promises/points, yet few have managed to actually be able to do so.
You mention that you will attempt to succeed where others have failed by
providing a feed of DPL activity news. While the specifics of your
plan may be innovative, the idea itself of constantly providing updates
rather than bulk ones has been promised by others in the past (e.g.,
Steve mentioned it in his 2008 platform). As such, I'm not convinced
this will help all that much;
How do you believe it will, and how do you think you are different from
other DPLs who have tried and failed to be more communicative?
There are various issue which I presume block sending frequently,
according to a given period, bits from the DPL mail to the project.
I believe a significant one among such issues is the expectation that
the DPL knows DDs have on the monthly bits, and therefore the perceived
weight of of preparing those bits. My guess is that, on these premises,
actually sending out the DPL bits mail is a time consuming and
potentially stressing matter. I believe that, by diluting it with the
feed idea, it will become way more bearable.
In fact, there is also a personal reason: I know that a feed like that
would fit quite well my usual way of working, since I like taking notes
of what I did in a work day, for future reference / not forgetting.
Given that the DPL is an elective body I believe it is just fair to have
such a flow of information public.
Mind you, I cannot guarantee the feeds will not be empty, real life can
strike back on me as it can with any of us. Nevertheless I want to try
establishing an important correlation: no bits ~= no work being done by
the DPL (and hence the right to inquire, complain, etc.).
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Questions for all candidates: decentralization of power
* Wouter Verhelst (wou...@debian.org) [100319 22:57]: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:36:53PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:44:23PM +, Clint Adams wrote: Is there any legitimate reason that wanna-build access should be restricted to any group smaller than the entirety of gid 800 membership? There was. [...snip history...] Of course, this bug has now been fixed: rather than using a libdb-based database, wanna-build is now running off a postgresql database. As such, it might be prudent to investigate whether giving regular developers read-access to that database could be doable (it might be difficult, given that wanna-build runs on a restricted host currently, or it might be simple; this is something for the wanna-build team to look into). But I don't think it's unfair to wait a while until all the issues have been dealt with before thinking about giving the developer body access to the database. It was pointed out to me on IRC by a member of the Debian sysadmin team that this has in fact already happened: buildd.debian.org, aka cimarosa.debian.org, is not a restricted host, and the wanna-build database is not restricted; every DD is able to access the database. Write-access is limited for the reasons Wouter pointed out above. Also, read-access to the security suites (which list not yet published packages) is limited for obvious reasons. Sometimes we need to change priorities of packages to e.g. get a transition done, or to avoid a starving situation (like now, we just lost one mips buildd due to a failing harddisk). If we prioritize certain packages this means other packages obviously get less priority. One needs to follow the relevant IRC channels plus lists to know how the situation currently is - sometimes we have enough spare ressources and packages can be easily tried a second and third time, and sometimes not. On the other hand, I don't believe that there are requests which are not dealt with in short time frame. (And if someone shows good judgement on requests it could easily mean that he'll probably get sufficient access rights soon.) Also note that while the above is true, the DSA team tells me that cimarosa is currently rather starved for IO; so while you can access the database, that does not mean necessarily mean you should, unless you've got a good reason to, since overusing it might interfere with the smooth functioning of the buildd network (and we don't want that, right?) If someone is seriously interessted in helping us with buildd / wanna-build, please just tell so. :) Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324090058.gq19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Question for all candidates: Release process
* Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org) [100317 01:52]: I propose that we reshape the sections and priorities of our archive, so that it is easy to remove from Testing any RC bug that is not in a core pakcage, and is old and not tagged RFH. We already do that, provided the RC bug is old enough. This (and other parts of your answer) show clearly that you don't know how the current release process works (and also didn't read our mails on debian-devel-announce). BTW, fixing of RC bugs is not done by the release team, but (thanksfully) by a large group of Debian Developers; of course also members of the release team fix RC bugs :) Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324091605.gr19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Q for all candidates: (Old) Architecture Support
* Yavor Doganov (ya...@gnu.org) [100317 14:55]: - mips/mipsel are probably the most hated archs by DDs in the past few months :-), and there's no ironclad way to secure their future too. First of all, the needs-build queue is almost empty on mipsel (and was on mips till we lost the hard disk on mayr). Also, we have new and faster machines. As of writing this I'm compiling a kernel which will hopefully help us with seeing why we get our new mips machines dead with 8 hours of compiling packages. For the mipsel machines, there is a new kernel with http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2010-03/txt23iVvbmCyX.txt since yesterday night. I hope to have time this week to try if I can still break the hardware. If we resolve mips or mipsel, we will have enough ressources to fix both architectures (because our current machines could run either flavour). I have the hope that we're not too far away from that. Of course, if we notice that we won't get new hardware anymore, and architecture is starting to die. But that's not true for mips and mipsel as of now. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324092018.gs19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Getting more people involved in core teams.
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I think that one of issues we have is that there is alot of work
to be done by some teams, some of them even regularaly mail that
they need more members, but they seem to have a hard time keeping
the numbers up, burning the other team members out.
What are your ideas to make sure those teams keep running?
In general, I believe that the lack of manpower in core teams is just
a representation in the small of the general lack of manpower we
suffer in the project. Having a better ability to attract new
contributors will most likely fix also the lack of manpower in specific
teams. How to attract more contributors has been discussed extensively
already in other threads and in most of candidate's platforms.
Now, assuming the current amount of manpower as stable, the point is how
to have more people migrate to become part of core teams. First of
all, as you observe, some of those teams regularly call for help and
(my addition) publish guidelines to become part of the team. This is
very good (as I've discussed elsewhere) but should be the rule for all
of the core teams (for some definition of core), not only some of
them.
About how, more specifically, the DPL can help in re-staffing core
teams, I've already voiced my opinion and plans in [1], here is the
quote that I found most appropriate from there:
Something I'd like to try if elected DPL is to keep a list of teams
in need of help [2]. Then, periodically and at worst in my monthly
bits from ... posts, I intend to have a section which kind of makes
a focus on the specific team which is looking for new people. It is
probably nothing and won't change much, but it is a worthwhile
attempt.
I also consider a responsibility of the DPL to prod specific people to
join core teams which are understaffed, as I believe has pretty much
always happened with past DPLs, but that can be no more than
invitations, in agreement with the involved team. (And no, that's no
excuse to lack transparent join rules for the team, it is just a way
to have team staffing going in both directions: passive and active.)
Cheers.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2010/03/msg00104.html
[2] yes, that list probably equates the overall list of Debian teams,
but managing priorities is something a DPL is expected to do
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Q for all candidates: (Old) Architecture Support
* Margarita Manterola (margamanter...@gmail.com) [100318 21:03]: I would like to support as many architectures as possible. We cannot deny the passage of time, however, and so we must accept that some architectures are bound to stop being supported. This even happened some years ago with 386. We still call the common architecture i386, but a real 386 computer wouldn't be able to run the current systems, since the kernel requires at least 486. And that happened before we removed m68k. (Technically it's not the kernel, but the way we set atomic locks within glibc - there used to be an patch lingering around for the kernel to emulate that behaviour, but using the patch opens an trivial root exploit, that's why we refused to use the patch.) Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324092434.gt19...@mails.so.argh.org
Re: Q for the Candidates: How many users?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:47:17AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
JFTR, I don't think that a quick and easy poll is always a
sufficient way to resolve issues. I think one of the strength of
Debian is that we try to analyze the situation before we do a
decision.
I absolutely agree. On one hand, that is why I've mentioned a poll and
not a GR. More importantly, there are some technical decisions that
ultimately arrive at an aut-aut choice, e.g. the choice of a default
value which is changeable by the user anyhow. I believe the case
discussed in the post you followed-up to is one of them. As other
choices of default values, what we've discussed reminds me very much of
when we switched from nvi to vim-tiny in the base system [1] (one of
the few cases in which we did use a poll, FWIW).
The whole point of a poll is to give a non-binding representation of
opinions in some aut-aut choices; such a representation can ultimately
be even ignored, but at least we will make it visible.
Hope this clarifies,
Cheers.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg00796.html
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.
Dear all, just for the record, I will not answer to insulting or accusatory emails. Some of them may contain interesting questions or comments, though. Please feel free to repeat them in a separate message if you also found them interesting. Cheers, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324100932.gc8...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Question for Charles Plessy (was: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.)
Hi Charles, Charles Plessy schrieb: just for the record, I will not answer to insulting or accusatory emails. Some of them may contain interesting questions or comments, though. Please feel free to repeat them in a separate message if you also found them interesting. That opens up for an interesting question: What ways to settle a conflict with fellow Debian Developers seem proper to you? Do we have to expect further unspecified ignores from your side should you be elected? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ba9ed7e.8030...@schmehl.info
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
On 24/03/10 00:27, Charles Plessy wrote: Our users, if they want to modify, study, redistribute or use after rebuild our system, need the source. At no moment these operations involve modifying a RFC or a binary program that is aimed at run on a Windows system. I conclude that that kind of file, although present in our source packages, are not part of the source of our operating system. To me, the sources of Debian are the source packages. Saying that something shipped in the source packages is not part of the Debian sources sounds a bit contradictory :) I understand well Stefano's point of view that we serve better our users by making things clear and removing these files from our source packages so that we can say that anything that is in our main section is DFSG-free. I do not think it is so useful, however, since one can not blindly use DFSG-free material as we tolerate advertisement clauses, renaming clauses, and clauses forbidding to sell the software alone. Not to mention patents and trademark issues. You can assume that the Debian sources are DFSG free. No more, no less. Arguing that since you can trust the sources are patent-free we should stop making them DFSG-free doesn't sound too logical to me. I think that we should have the possibility to redistribute a bit-identical upstream archive when possible. We have. I do it all the time. When the upstream tarball is free. In the title of my platform, I wrote ‘more trust’. What we can do with repacked tarballes, we can do with pristine ones. If we do not trust each other that a couple of useless non-DFSG-free files can be ignored, what else can't we trust ? We trust each other not to introduce non-free works in the upstream tarballs when packaging new releases. Isn't that trust? I don't buy how 'trust that a developer introduces non-free works' is anything we want. Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ba9ebff.2010...@debian.org
Re: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: just for the record, I will not answer to insulting or accusatory emails. Some of them may contain interesting questions or comments, though. Please feel free to repeat them in a separate message if you also found them interesting. OK, so I do have a few followup questions: (1) What do you consider to be insulting or accusatory? (2) As example: Will you, as DPL, consider You haven't answered in the past four weeks as accusatory? (3) How will we, as DDs, know if you consider something as insuluting or accusatory? (4) Do you believe ignoring conflicts to be a solution? Marc -- BOFH #408: Computers under water due to SYN flooding. pgpcnaicNKrUm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.
Hi! * Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org [2010-03-24 19:09:32 +0900]: just for the record, I will not answer to insulting or accusatory emails. Some of them may contain interesting questions or comments, though. Please feel free to repeat them in a separate message if you also found them interesting. Thanks for the headsup - can I take it that this is the reason why there is no response from you to my question about Disappearing DPLs, that you consider it insulting or accusatory? Have fun. Rhonda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324114005.ga30...@anguilla.debian.or.at
Re: Question to all (other) candidates
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:57:16AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 06:49:51PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: So, since part of the reason that I joined the race was to make sure it wouldn't get too boring, I was hoping there'd be a bit more life on this list. Since there isn't, allow me to ask a few questions myself. FWIW, I disagree with that or, better, I think too boring is a subjective notion. I've been indexing DPL campaigning questions this and last year, and we're currently at about 20 discussion topics, with 1 more week of campaigning ahead of us. Last year campaigning has been *way* more quiet :-) Sure, but to a certain extent that depends on the number of candidates. If you look back a few more years, you'll see much more. snip There are various issue which I presume block sending frequently, according to a given period, bits from the DPL mail to the project. I believe a significant one among such issues is the expectation that the DPL knows DDs have on the monthly bits, and therefore the perceived weight of of preparing those bits. My guess is that, on these premises, actually sending out the DPL bits mail is a time consuming and potentially stressing matter. I believe that, by diluting it with the feed idea, it will become way more bearable. I hope so, yes. :-) For me, the bits emails take a long time to prepare. And the longer you leave between doing them, the bigger and more intimidating they become. It's a vicious cycle. :-/ -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm afraid I'll miss my stop -- Vivek Dasmohapatra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324111214.ga24...@einval.com
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
Hi, On Dienstag, 23. März 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote: The second option aims at clarifying what is the source of the Debian operating system. It is controversial. It is a lot but not controversial, actually its pretty clear. For that statement alone *I* hope NOTA will have a big win over you, sorry. It shows you are way off with actual project. I've been thinking about this statement last night and this morning and noon, and came to the conclusion that I have to fullheartly agree with what Joerg wrote. Charles, I think your ideas how Debian should change because it's oh so much work for no gain to do the right thing are almost insulting to the core values of the project. Good thing that values cannot be insulted ;-) cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: I you would like to guarantee to the users that unpacked debian source is DFSG we should hook into unpack (similar to DpkgSrc3.0 / quilt) and remove DFSG blobs at maintainers discretion for example by parsing debian/copyright. [...] This change will result in maintainers spending less time by recuding effort required for packaging software with non-DFSG-pristine-tarball. Debian developer time is precious and very limited and IMHO should be used as efficiently as possible. IMHO, writing a hook at unpack time to remove non-DFSG stuff and repackaging require the same effort. I would even say the former is more error-prone (in the sense that it can leave non-DFSG bits behind in some unexpected situation) and therefore requires more time. Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4baa0b82.5050...@glondu.net
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:00:38PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: Hi, On Dienstag, 23. März 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote: The second option aims at clarifying what is the source of the Debian operating system. It is controversial. It is a lot but not controversial, actually its pretty clear. For that statement alone *I* hope NOTA will have a big win over you, sorry. It shows you are way off with actual project. I've been thinking about this statement last night and this morning and noon, and came to the conclusion that I have to fullheartly agree with what Joerg wrote. Charles, I think your ideas how Debian should change because it's oh so much work for no gain to do the right thing are almost insulting to the core values of the project. Good thing that values cannot be insulted ;-) At the risk of repeating myself (I already said it in an answer to Charles' GR proposal), these core values are also what all DDs agreed to abide by. If Charles doesn't like Debian's core values, maybe he should resign. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324131023.ga2...@glandium.org
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:32:19 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote 2. If tarball is not redistributable It belongs in non-free, or must be repackaged to become redistributable No, If its not redistributable, It doesn't belong in non-free or any other place we distribute software. This is why we don't distribute other popular non-redistributable software like Opera or skype or flash in non-free. stew signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to all (other) candidates
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:12:14AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Sure, but to a certain extent that depends on the number of
candidates. If you look back a few more years, you'll see much more.
Oh, absolutely, it was not meant to be a blame on last year candidates
(also because I was one of them *g*). Still, it is not _only_ related to
the number of candidates, as you already acknowledged: we could have
been grilled last year with tons of questions even if we were only
two. Anyhow, I didn't want to deviate to much into this, I just meant to
point out that the impression that this year campaigning has been too
quite is not necessarily shared by everybody (and in particular it is
not shared by me).
For me, the bits emails take a long time to prepare. And the longer
you leave between doing them, the bigger and more intimidating they
become. It's a vicious cycle. :-/
Thanks for confirming! (and shame on me for not having actually asked
that directly to you, given that I had occasions to do that)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
I'm still an SGML person,this newfangled /\ All one has to do is hit the
XML stuff is so ... simplistic -- Manoj \/ right keys at the right time
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324142803.gd8...@fettunta.org
Re: Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:09:43AM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
The following question is optional, as it discloses private information,
so feel free not to answer it. But non the less, I'm curious and would
appreciate, if you would be willing to answer. So here it goes:
Suppose that you would not run for DPL: Who would you vote and why?
So, I apologize, but I'm not going to disclose my leader vote in public.
I believe that there is a good reason for having secret votes in leader
elections (constitution §5.2.2), namely: knowing how you did vote for or
against a fellow DD can get personal. Even if I personally don't think
to be much affected by that: (1) I can't be sure and (2) I don't want to
take the risk to inflict that to the other candidates.
The why part of your question is way more interesting, but I believe
it can be answered by rather asking candidates how much they like
specific proposals of the other candidates and why. The rebuttals are a
first step in that direction; if mine are not enough, I generally
welcome questions on proposals of the other candidates that I've not
specifically addressed in my rebuttals.
I hope nobody will hold this against me.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
I'm still an SGML person,this newfangled /\ All one has to do is hit the
XML stuff is so ... simplistic -- Manoj \/ right keys at the right time
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324144547.ge8...@fettunta.org
Re: Question to Candidates: Disappearing DPLs?
Le Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 08:30:03AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs a écrit : Hi! I have a question to the candidates: History has shown that DPLs more or less disappear not too long after their period or at least reduce their visible efforts immensly. I wonder where you see the reasons for this trend, what your impression is about it and wether you try to follow that trend or what you will try to do to not have this happen to you, too. Hi Gerfried, sorry for taking long to answer. This obviously demonstrates that we are not always as available as we wished. If after being elected my free time is strongly and permanently reduced, I will shorten my mandate. But I promise I will look left and right before crossing a street full of buses :) It is difficult to add much to what the other candidates and Anthony have already answered to this question. Being DPL can definitely be a final achievement that replenishes the energy and thirst for exploring other worlds. In my case, I think that I am far from having achieved my goals in Debian. When answering the “10 years” question, I wrote that I think that running Debian will mean more than just having it on one's destkop computer. I want to contribute to this adventure, this is why I participate to a Blends project and more modestly to some efforts for bringing Debian in the Clouds. I think that this combination, together with backports and snapshots, will be very powerful in the future. But this also challenges the way we publish our work. One of my motivations for standing as a DPL is to propose to the Project to expand in that direction. I think that after a one year term, I will be eager to go back to my Debian Med activities, and keep on hard work until the harvest. Have a nice day, [By the way, I apologise to all the persons who asked quiestions but did not yet get an answer. As Stefano noted, this campaign is much more intensive than last year's. This is something that I have not expected.] -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324145227.ga11...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Re: Question for Charles Plessy (was: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.)
Le Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:46:22AM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl a écrit : That opens up for an interesting question: What ways to settle a conflict with fellow Debian Developers seem proper to you? Do we have to expect further unspecified ignores from your side should you be elected? Le Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:58:47AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt a écrit : OK, so I do have a few followup questions: (1) What do you consider to be insulting or accusatory? (2) As example: Will you, as DPL, consider You haven't answered in the past four weeks as accusatory? (3) How will we, as DDs, know if you consider something as insuluting or accusatory? (4) Do you believe ignoring conflicts to be a solution? Hi again, ignoring conflicts is the best way to have them explode at the worse moment. On the other hands, being insulted on a mailing list does not call for an answer. This is the best receipe for having flamewars. If I am elected DPL, I will not ignore requests. Neither will I filtrate my mailbox (but deleting spam by hand also leads to accidental loss of messages). I will read all my emails. I hope I will not disapoint you, but I will not give a lecture of what is an insult or what is not. I promise that I will not nitpick people's words to find excuses to not do my DPL work. Lastly, for the meaning of ‘accusatory’, perhaps I could have found a better word? But I am not a native speaker. What I mean is that if in one message, somebody writes ‘you want this [bad thing]’ or ‘you did not do that [good thing]’, it can be better to refrain to answer in a discussion that goes nowhere. As a DPL, however, I would clarify if people spread false informations on our mailing lists. Cheers, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324153605.ga11...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Re: Questions for all candidates: decentralization of power
Hi! On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Clint Adams sch...@debian.org wrote: 5) Is there any part of Debian that should be restricted to a small subset of developers, and if so why? So, I've taken quite a while to ponder about these questions, particularly this last one. Several people have already replied with particular reasons of why a certain service should be less than open. My general take on the issue is that through the NM process, we can only assure that a DD knows how to package, how to handle bugs and how to do uploads. We can't assure that every DD knows how to handle the wanna-build queue, how to use wml, or whatever special knowledge is needed for a certain task. With that in mind, I think that if the policy to get access is simply ask and you are granted it, it's basically the same as if everybody had access, with the benefit that you know who is it that is interested in working on some part, and you can make sure that they at least have the pointers to where the documentation is located. A part of Debian with such a policy could not be said to be restricted to a subset of developers, but only currently involving a subset of developers. As long as an open policy is kept and response to requests is fast enough, I don't mind having to ask to get access to a certain part to which I want to contribute. However, if only certain people who belong to certain circles can work on a part of Debian, then we are probably falling into elitism, and we should inspect that to check what's going on. But also, yes, there are parts of Debian that should be restricted. Even without taking security into account, I think it would be extremely chaotic if we all had root in all the Debian machines. Or, if we all had it but wanted to avoid chaos, we'd need to agree on a group of people that actually take the decisions regarding the setups, and refrain from changing stuff to each one's liking, thus having a restricted group that takes the decisions. Now to the specific cases you asked about: 1) 114 people have commit access to webwml. Given that version control makes it easy to undo changes, minimizing risk and impact, are there any legitimate reasons why this repository should be restricted to a group any smaller than the whole of gid 800? As I said, given than the policy here is ask and you get it, I don't see anything wrong. It's also good to know that you don't need to be a DD (i.e. know about packaging) in order to be able to contribute to the website, which makes this example even less restricted. The legitimate reason can simply be being to be able to know who's working on what, and make sure they are aware of how the work on the website is done. 2) wanna-build access is restricted to a small number of developers, but there is no uncorrectable damage that can be caused by someone making mistakes. Is there any legitimate reason that wanna-build access should be restricted to any group smaller than the entirety of gid 800 membership? Others with much more knowledge about this than me have already explained the reasons of why it was so closed in the past and how it has improved in the present. Even if no uncorrectable damage can be done, by messing up with the wanna-build queue, someone could hog the buildds, and thus it's important to know that people with write access know what they are doing. This doesn't mean that we should have a closed circle of wanna-build gurus, but that to get access you should at least show interest in what's going on. 3) An ftpmaster cabal of times long past used to use the phrase mirror pulse to justify oppressing the freedom of other developers, but we do not hear those words used much anymore. However, the word trusted has continued its prevalence in situations where one developer is considered better than another. Is there any legitimate reason why one DD should be considered more trusted than another without having earned such trust? As others, I have no idea what you are pointing at here. I'd say that it is normal that some DDs are more trusted than others, but specifically because they have earned that trust. I cannot figure out in what situation someone is more trusted without having earned such trust. Or what it has to do with the mirror pulse. 4) The tech-ctte has the power to appoint its own members. I do not know why they should be allowed to self-manage when their judgment on the issues raised to them has often been less-than-stellar. It is also accepted that core teams should have the same power, and one common claim is that the team members have the right to exclude anyone who does not get along with them or agree with their approaches. Is there any legitimate reason why core teams should be allowed to select their own members with or without external oversight? I think that the main reason for this is that it would be extremely annoying for everyone involved if it was done otherwise. It'd be annoying for the
Re: Question to all (other) candidates
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote: In my rebuttal, I mention that I lack a sense of vision in your platform. In case that wasn't clear, this is because the ideas you mention, while they might work to some extent, seem to be a bit superficial; I'm afraid they will not strike at the heart of the issues we face. Do you believe this is correct? If not, can you clarify? That's weird, I definitely thought that there was a vision in my platform. The ideas listed are just some things that can be done to achieve the general goals. They are not meant to be a complete list of everything that I plan to do if elected, just some starting points. The main objective is to go towards the goal of making the work done in Debian more attractive and more satisfying to everyone involved. Many of us have noted that one of the serious problems Debian is facing is the lack of committed people in many areas, I think that working actively into making our work in Debian more attractive to everybody is the only way to fix this lack of work force. Also, you seem to have received a great deal of help in writing your platform. In the interest of clarity, can you shine a light on how this happened? To mention two possible extremes, was this more of a I'd like to run, but would need a platform, please send me some ideas, or rather hey, $RANDOM_PEOPLE, here's a platform, please give me some comments? (I realize the truth is probably somewhere in between those two, but would like to know exactly what we get if I were to vote you second...) As you say, it's some point in the middle. When I first started thinking about running for DPL, I started discussing ideas back and forth with a small number of people, coming up with what would be good starting points and what could be done to make things better in Debian. After that, I drafted the platform and asked a few other people to comment, and then I improved the platform with their comments. I made a point of thanking all whose input was valuable to me, even though it doesn't mean they'd vote for me or that they support me as DPL in any way, because I think that a DPL should be able to listen to everybody's ideas, and make the best out of them, and I think that giving credit is very important. I've already said that I plan to delegate a lot. I don't think it makes sense for a DPL to try to do everything, it only leads to burn-out and dissatisfaction. I also plan to listen to what other ideas people have to make Debian better and put them into motion. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241024x2cecf23fn1ed803a2a3837...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl alexan...@schmehl.info wrote: The following question is optional, as it discloses private information, so feel free not to answer it. But non the less, I'm curious and would appreciate, if you would be willing to answer. So here it goes: I was actually going to reply, but after reading zack's answer, I agree it's best not to give out the details. In any case, I do have an answer: Suppose that you would not run for DPL: Who would you vote and why? I would, and will, vote for all of them. I won't disclose the particular order, but they'll all be above NOTA. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241032p779a8b92mf96794c9bd874...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
Hi, On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Bernd Zeimetz be...@bzed.de wrote: with 20100124144741.gd13...@kunpuu.plessy.org Charles Plessy came up with a draft GR Simplification of license and copyright requirements for the Debian packages.. I'd like to know from Charles Plessy if the draft from January still reflect his current opinion or if his mind changed. From the other candidates I'd like to know their opinion and plans (if there are any) about license/copyright requirements in Debian. I agree with zack that this is not a decision that the DPL should take. It's a decision that should be done through a GR, that the DPL can support or not, but I hope that Charles knows that even if he won, it wouldn't mean that it'd be ok to change such policy without a GR (or, at least, another form of consensus on this matter). Regarding the proposal itself, I'm not sure I see how much we would be gaining by not mentioning the copyright holder or reproducing the copyright notice. We would still have to analyze whether the license requires the copyright notice, the copyright holder, or both. In that case, I think it's simpler to keep with what we have, but I don't have too strong a position about this. Regarding software in the source packages, I do believe that The Debian System is both the binary and the source packages, and as such we shouldn't distribute non-free stuff, either in the binary or in the source packages. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241045o58258be5x3047377b2864e...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
Hi Marga, On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:45:11PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote: On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Bernd Zeimetz be...@bzed.de wrote: with 20100124144741.gd13...@kunpuu.plessy.org Charles Plessy came up with a draft GR Simplification of license and copyright requirements for the Debian packages.. I'd like to know from Charles Plessy if the draft from January still reflect his current opinion or if his mind changed. From the other candidates I'd like to know their opinion and plans (if there are any) about license/copyright requirements in Debian. I agree with zack that this is not a decision that the DPL should take. It's a decision that should be done through a GR, that the DPL can support or not, but I hope that Charles knows that even if he won, it wouldn't mean that it'd be ok to change such policy without a GR (or, at least, another form of consensus on this matter). Regarding the proposal itself, I'm not sure I see how much we would be gaining by not mentioning the copyright holder or reproducing the copyright notice. We would still have to analyze whether the license requires the copyright notice, the copyright holder, or both. In that case, I think it's simpler to keep with what we have, but I don't have too strong a position about this. Regarding software in the source packages, I do believe that The Debian System is both the binary and the source packages, and as such we shouldn't distribute non-free stuff, either in the binary or in the source packages. If I understand you correctly, you dissociate yourself from Charles's POV about what's part of Debian and thus what needs to be free according to DFSG. In another thread you said all other candidates are above NOTA for you. After reading a few very strong opinions about what Charles said earlier wrt source and binary packages, I suppose some of them (and maybe others) might find that a bit contradicting. Actually that's how I read KiBi's last mail in the Who would you vote for thread. Would you mind commenting on that? Hauke signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Q for the Candidates: How many users?
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 4:19 AM, Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au wrote: What's your estimate of the current number of Debian users? Do Debian users include Debian derivatives users? :) I think this question is indeed very tricky, and I don't see the point of it being posted as a question during the campaign period. How can my estimation change your vote? I certainly do believe that we have many more thank 90k users, and the only reason that we don't count so many of them in popcon is that our direct users get to choose whether they want to participate in popcon or not, and many times they don't. I'll refrain from estimating a number. I'll just say that I plan to work on making Debian more attractive to users, not by changing what we do, but by trying to change how Debian is perceived to be (i.e. a difficult distribution). -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241108h4a66i46aef04dd7611...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Jan Hauke Rahm j...@debian.org wrote: If I understand you correctly, you dissociate yourself from Charles's POV about what's part of Debian and thus what needs to be free according to DFSG. In another thread you said all other candidates are above NOTA for you. Yes, that's correct. After reading a few very strong opinions about what Charles said earlier wrt source and binary packages, I suppose some of them (and maybe others) might find that a bit contradicting. Actually that's how I read KiBi's last mail in the Who would you vote for thread. Yes, I was talking with KiBi about this on IRC just now. I guess there's not a clear position on what rating someone below NOTA really means. I feel that rating someone below NOTA is not to be done lightly, while other people probably feel it's a normal way of showing you disagree. Would you mind commenting on that? For me, rating someone below NOTA doesn't just mean I wouldn't like this person as DPL, it means I wouldn't stay in Debian if this person was elected. Reviewing my past votes, only in 2006 and 2007 have I voted someone below NOTA, and those were extreme cases where I felt very strongly that a candidate might be damaging to the project. KiBi's questioning, however, has made me think that maybe I was taking the below/above NOTA to an extreme. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241146l480cce22v275c9c448b5d8...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes: So, I apologize, but I'm not going to disclose my leader vote in public. I think the better phrasing for the original question would be: List reasons why the other candidates would make a good DPL. This question does not ask you to divulge your potential vote - unless you can find good reasons for only one candidate :) -- * Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) * * PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer * -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ocidzfw0@inara.killeri.net
Re: Question to the candidates
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote: As a developer, how do you embody the spirit and culture that has made Debian a great operating system? This is a very difficult question, because answering it implies that I accept that I do embody such spirit and culture, and I find this statement too arrogant to make it myself. Instead, I'll say that the most important thing about Debian, for me, is that Our priorities are our users and free software. This line has shaped a lot of what we do in Debian, towards making the Universal OS. One of the great things about our priority being our users is that we don't specify which users. Servers, desktops or embedded users; sysadmins, engineers, websurfers or gamers, they are all our users, and thus we need to work real hard to make the best OS possible for all of them at the same time. I find this very inspiring, and it has shaped how I do my work for Debian. Trying to have the best for everybody is hard, but I think it's worth all the work done. If elected DPL, how will you inspire the same in others? As I said in my platform, I think we should have project-wide goals. I plan to set goals that would help Debian be even better than what it is today, and hope to inspire more people to work on those goals. I don't plan to come up with these specific goals all by myself, though, I plan to do it in consultation with the whole developer body, but I'd make sure that these goals all had our users and free software as their priority. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241236n4ed5edd0t105e67867ec43...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Getting more people involved in core teams.
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote: I think that one of issues we have is that there is alot of work to be done by some teams, some of them even regularaly mail that they need more members, but they seem to have a hard time keeping the numbers up, burning the other team members out. As has been said in this thread and others, Debian is currently suffering from lack of involved people in almost all areas, not only in specific teams. And thus we need to reach out and get more people involved, in general, not only for the core teams. But I'll answer about core teams in particular. What are your ideas to make sure those teams keep running? I'd like to have two Teams that need your help pages, clearly listing the teams that need help and what is needed in order to help them. One of these pages would be contributor oriented, and the other one developer oriented. If a team has tasks that anybody can do, and tasks that require DD access, it can be listed in both pages, if you only can help by being a DD, then it can be listed in the developer page only. I also think that sometimes people get burned out when working in the core teams, because most of their work goes unnoticed. I'd like to raise awareness of the work done by these core teams, so that they could get more credit for what they do, and thus feel a bit more respected by the project as a whole. Zack's idea of mentioning the teams that need help in the Bits from the DPL message, is also another way of reminding potential team members that their help is needed. I'd do that too. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241250x56fa6269wf6910fe6482cc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Question for the other candidates: supermajority.
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org wrote: After the very painful GR about “Lenny and resolving DFSG violations”, discussions started about our voting system, and the fact that it does not accomodate well with mixture of supermajority and regular options. Also, disagreements whether an option needs the supermajority often starts bitter debates. Do you think it is a problem that you would like to solve as a DPL? Not at all. I think this is the kind of problem that should be solved either by consensus or by a GR. I don't think it would do any good to solve it as DPL. For the supermajority, I think that it should be used only when modifying directly foundation documents. As a compensation, we may let the Secretary declare a GR ‘unconstitutional’ and refuse to let it be applied. This would remove a lot of meta-discussion in GRs that already produce many emails. In contrary with our current sytem, constitutionality of an option would only be decided after it gets the Condorcet majority. I don't think this makes any sense. It'd mean that we would be voting for something only to have it invalidated after it's voted. It would lead to a lot of flamewars, and probably to the resignation of the acting secretary. I think the best scenario is that the secretary states why a certain option would require supermajority, and then the proposer can a) re-formulate the option so that it doesn't require supermajority, b) present it as a separate ballot, c) accept to have mixed options in the ballot. I think that if what's going on is clear for everybody, it's easier to reach some common ground, to find an option that suits the interests of the proposer without requiring supermajority. Having to wait until the end of the election process to hear what the secretary thinks would only mean lost time and a lot of frustration. This said, I have not mentionned supermajority issues in my platform, since I think that the main points I propose would keep me busy enough if I am elected. I would be pleased however if somebody would self-appoint and lead this debate, if there is the impression that it is needed. I would definitely not lead it myself, and I would rather we spent our time in more productive activities. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241304l6ecfa2e5r5704abb38b470...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Question to all (other) candidates
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 06:49:51PM +0100, I wrote: So, since part of the reason that I joined the race was to make sure it wouldn't get too boring, I was hoping there'd be a bit more life on this list. Since there isn't, allow me to ask a few questions myself. [Stefano] FWIW, I disagree with that or, better, I think too boring is a subjective notion. I've been indexing DPL campaigning questions this and last year, and we're currently at about 20 discussion topics, with 1 more week of campaigning ahead of us. Last year campaigning has been *way* more quiet :-) Well, last year's election was a bit exceptional in that there was almost nothing to do here on -vote. The previous election I participated in, OTOH, was one of the most contested elections in Debian's history. I guess we're both a bit biased in opposite ways :-) ... and while we are on rebuttals, let me comment a specific point of your rebuttals to my platform: the one about the website. Reading your rebuttals, it seems that I intend to favor external over internal contributions to the website. This is not the case, as it is made clear by the usage of the expression emergency plan. Indeed; after re-reading your platform, I notice that I initially misread it. Apologies; I'll remove that part from my rebuttal. Now, since fair is fair, I'm looking forward for your comments to my rebuttals about your platform :-) Well, since you ask :-) [Stefano's rebuttal] For once, the idea of talking more with “Debian people” other than DDs/DMs is wonderful—assuming that by that Wouter imagines the DPL attending several events other than our “classical” developer-oriented events. That however is not enough, because the big public of our potential contributors is not (only) there. To that end, I found striking that our Web presence is not mentioned in the platform as an important strategic area to attract more developers. When I mention talking in my platform, I do not (only) mean that literally. I intend to talk to many people in many ways; One vague idea I've been thinking about is a web poll or some such. However, since I don't know whether or how that will work out in practice, I didn't think it proper to mention it in my platform and thereby make it a promise, or some such. Charles: In your platform, in the Program section, you mention four ideas that could reasonable be described as being about the things that, respectively, the DAM and NM frontdesk, the ftp-masters, and the Release Managers (twice) are responsible for. Did you talk with these teams about your ideas before running for DPL? If not, do you believe this may cause problems? Are you still planning to, and may your ideas change if you do? If you did talk to these teams beforehand, did your plans change any as a result, or do you anticipate that still happening? [Daniel] This comes across as calling Charles out for not consulting other people (or at least not acknowledging their contributions). Indeed it was. When one puts forward ideas that a) could be considered to be rather radical, and b) involve something that particular groups in the project have worked on for quite a while, I think it is imperative that these people are at the very least aware of your plans and have had a chance to comment on it, *before* you start making it public in something like a DPL platform. To do otherwise is creating expectations that these groups might have told you cannot be reasonably followed up on anyway. [Charles] I have not contacted these teams in private or in public. I expect the three weeks of campaign to be long enough to openly discuss what I propose. I believe this is wrong. For one, a campaign is the worst time to discuss plans like these, because you're betting your election on it. For another, you've not explicitly talked to the teams, so though unlikely, it's perfectly possible that they're not even aware of your plans. Finally, if you think three weeks is enough to discuss anything radical in Debian, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken -- I remember the fuzz about the Vancouver proposal to take at least twice that time. And remember there's still an election going on, too. (so, to answer my own question: no, I do not think it is a good idea to come up with radical suggestions in DPL platforms without at the very least having had them pass by the relevant teams for input) [...] In my platform, I have separate sections for ‘Program’ and ‘What I will do as DPL’. In short: vote for my if you like my program, but I will not come to the core teams with a long shopping list of things to do. This is not fun, nor it gives trust to the teams that do the work. Good to know that; it does alleviate some of my concerns. However, I'm not convinced this is entirely clear for everyone who reads your platform. Marga: [...] Also, you seem to have received a great deal of help in writing your platform. In the interest of clarity, can you
Re: Getting more people involved in core teams.
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: I think that one of issues we have is that there is alot of work to be done by some teams, some of them even regularaly mail that they need more members, but they seem to have a hard time keeping the numbers up, burning the other team members out. What are your ideas to make sure those teams keep running? This is a similar question to Marc Haber's one in 20100315103039.ga15...@torres.zugschlus.de. To quote from my response to that question: But I believe the problem is wider than just the core infrastructure; it is about the project as a whole facing competition for attracting distribution developers by the fact that there are several other community-based distributions out there today than there were about a decade ago. I think that also applies here: lack of manpower is not a problem that is specific to our core teams, but instead is a general problem within Debian. To solve it long-term, we need to make Debian more attractive for contributors. This is a difficult problem to solve, however. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question for the other candidates: supermajority.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:24:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:03:32PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : For whatever it's worth, I believe the second option changes the foundation documents and would require a 3:1 majority. The person who's canonical on that is the Secretary. Dear Russ, Stefano, Wouter and Margarita. I would like to take the opportunity of Russ's comment to ask to the other candidates their opinions about the supermajority votes. After the very painful GR about “Lenny and resolving DFSG violations”, discussions started about our voting system, and the fact that it does not accomodate well with mixture of supermajority and regular options. I'm not quite convinced that was the case; as I remember what happened then, these discussions were more about whether some options would have needed a supermajority to begin with. Also, disagreements whether an option needs the supermajority often starts bitter debates. Do you think it is a problem that you would like to solve as a DPL? I believe this problem has been solved already. During the vote you refer to, it became rather apparent that the then-current secretary, Manoj Srivastava, had a different opinion on when a vote would require a supermajority than did many developers in the project. As a direct result of that, the secretary decided to resign from his post. We have had some discussion, and I believe the general consensus on what needs to happen is now much clearer, and also shared by the current secretary. If the current secretary feels that there are still some areas in which things could be made clearer, we can have a GR to clarify the constitution. However, I don't think that is necessary. During the discussions that started after the GR, I suggested that the GR proposer should have more control about the options put to the vote. In particular, it would be useful if he can refuse an option that would disequilibrate the voting system. That would make him responsible for the success of the GR: discarding a popular option is taking the risk that the whole GR is refused and the option is accepted as a separate GR, which is the kind of public failure that I expect that people will avoid. I'm not quite sure that's a very good idea, but perhaps it could work. For the supermajority, I think that it should be used only when modifying directly foundation documents. I agree, and I feel this is the current consensus within the project. [...] -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to the candidates
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:49:53PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: As a developer, how do you embody the spirit and culture that has made Debian a great operating system? I think I'm a person who's not afraid to try something if I think it will improve the project in some way. I'm also not afraid to back out if I made a mistake; I've done so on several occasions. This is similar to how Debian keeps its mistakes and problems in public -- we even made that part of our social contract. I do not really embody the 'spirit and culture' of flaming people (although there have been exceptions), but I don't think that's a great loss. If elected DPL, how will you inspire the same in others? Passively, by example; Actively, by (politely) challenging people who are working in what I feel to be a counterproductive way, and by encouraging others to do the same. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:09:43AM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: Suppose that you would not run for DPL: Who would you vote and why? I have a habit of publically (on my blog) disclosing my DPL vote, with explanation, and will probably do so again this year (though that is not by any means certain). However, as I did last time when I ran for DPL, I will not disclose my vote before voting is over. The reason for this is simple: First, I don't finalize my thoughts on how to vote before campaigning is over. I think that's only fair; there might be something that pops up during campaigning that makes me think twice about voting for some candidate, even though I very much like a given candidate or his/her platform. Or, on the contrary, a candidate might have a poor platform but convince me during campaigning. As such, I cannot disclose my vote until I actually cast it, because I could (and often do) change my vote fairly last-minute. Second, during the vote campainging is supposed to be over, so it would not be proper for me to to then disclose and comment on my vote if I'm running myself. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Question for Charles Plessy (was: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.)
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:36:05AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Lastly, for the meaning of ‘accusatory’, perhaps I could have found a better word? But I am not a native speaker. What I mean is that if in one message, somebody writes ‘you want this [bad thing]’ or ‘you did not do that [good thing]’, it can be better to refrain to answer in a discussion that goes nowhere. As a DPL, however, I would clarify if people spread false informations on our mailing lists. The position of DPL attracts rather a lot of press attention. This at times will be accusatory, inflamatory and downright rude. Welcome to the world of journalism. Do you intend to ignore these, or just ones from developers? Neil -- vorlon We need a fresher website - WordPress is the perfect solution, that way the website can get a new look every time a script kiddie comes up with a new design -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324201217.gr28...@halon.org.uk
Re: Q for all candidates: license and copyright requirements
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:10:23PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: At the risk of repeating myself (I already said it in an answer to Charles' GR proposal), these core values are also what all DDs agreed to abide by. If Charles doesn't like Debian's core values, maybe he should resign. The last thing that Debian needs right now is losing even more personpower. 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 3221 2323190 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324214546.gb23...@torres.zugschlus.de
To all candidates: personal mentoring
Dear candidates, With respect to attracting new contributors, please ponder the idea of a formal one-on-one mentoring scheme (as opposed to one-off interactions via d-mentors). I do realise that personal mentorship takes time; that's a reason to set criteria [1] and thresholds on who gets to have a mentor [2], instead of not considering the idea all together. I'd think that, in addition to encouraging more contributors to commit, this would also improve Debian's perception as a welcoming place, and new contributors' feeling of belonging to the project (would anybody even notice if I were ran down by a bus?) Or maybe not. What do /you/ think? Cheers, Serafeim [0] related talk for inspiration: http://2009.r2.co.nz/20100118/50249.htm [1] say, only people that want to eventually become DDs [2] random idea: any outsider that's fixed X bugs -- debtags-organised WNPP bugs: http://members.hellug.gr/serzan/wnpp -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324231544.ga3...@mobee
Re: Question for Charles Plessy (was: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.)
Le Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 08:12:17PM +, Neil McGovern a écrit : The position of DPL attracts rather a lot of press attention. This at times will be accusatory, inflamatory and downright rude. Welcome to the world of journalism. Do you intend to ignore these, or just ones from developers? Hi Neil, I think I remember discussions where people were disapointed about what journalists have put in the DPL's mouth. For written interviews, I seriously consider to post my answers first on -private for comments. For something completely unrelated to Debian, I have done a phone interview in the past. While the result was not too bad, the journalist was definitely in a strong position to lead the discussion in a way that produces quite predictable answers. If I am elected DPL, I will decline that kind of interviews. If after all these precautions, there is an article that still deforms what I said or wrote, then yes, depending on the situation I may ignore it according to the importance of the media, perhaps after consulting the DDs on debian-private. Internet is very big, and to try to correct things that are written there often has the effect to make them more visible. Have a nice day, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324233026.ga13...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Re: To all candidates: personal mentoring
Hi! On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Serafeim Zanikolas ser...@hellug.gr wrote: With respect to attracting new contributors, please ponder the idea of a formal one-on-one mentoring scheme (as opposed to one-off interactions via d-mentors). There's been a mentoring program inside the Debian Women project since 2004. This program got a few people at the beginning, but very soon we were out of mentees. There was an attempt to revive it at some point, but the problem was the same, there weren't enough mentees. However, I do think that it's a good idea, and maybe the lack of interest was due to lack of enough marketing about the program. I agree that it could be a good thing to try out in order to get more people to help in Debian. This idea, as well as many other ideas that we are discussing during the campaign, doesn't actually require the DPL intervention. What's needed to put this into motion is a group of potential mentors, a point of contact for the potential mentees, and a webpage or the like to advertise the program. Anyone with enough motivation can start it. -- Besos, Marga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e8bbf0361003241653y49dfb24dr7f28d1e6fe9fd...@mail.gmail.com
Question about membership.
Dear all, Following the ‘Membership procedures’ GR, discussion on membership were started after the Lenny release, but eventually stopped. In this thread it was proposed to trust DDs to nominate other members and I found the idea very interesting. In order to make it more consensual, there is probably a need for making concessions like shortlisting the trusted DDs according to some criteria like the time they have already spent in the project. I would actually be tempted to propose a more variable but more symbolic measurment of time: having been part of the project for at least one full release cycle. I have put membership issues as a first priority in my platform. Partly because I have contributeed to the rejection of a proposal and feel resposible to not leave the Project in inaction, partly because I think that the the contribution of DMs is growing and I do not feel like leaving them out of the project. In my platform, I suggest in my second priority (less restricted operations) that social control can replace technical control. I think that most DMs could be DDs now. If I am elected DPL, I will re-open the discussion and lead them in a way that maximises everybody's contribution, for instance by making pauses if necessary, and by posting neutral summaries. After the discussion reaches conclusion, I will initiate a GR. So my question to other candidates is simple: what is your opinion and program about membership? Have a nice day, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100325001744.gc13...@kunpuu.plessy.org
Re: To all candidates: personal mentoring
Le Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:15:45AM +0100, Serafeim Zanikolas a écrit : Dear candidates, I do realise that personal mentorship takes time; that's a reason to set criteria [1] and thresholds on who gets to have a mentor [2], instead of not considering the idea all together. I'd think that, in addition to encouraging more contributors to commit, this would also improve Debian's perception as a welcoming place, and new contributors' feeling of belonging to the project (would anybody even notice if I were ran down by a bus?) Dear Serafeim, I just proposed to simplify the procedures to become a member of the Debian project. But I have good memories of the interactions of my application manager when I was asking to become a Debian Developer. I think that the current NM (New Maintainer) process is a significant investment of time on possible new members. Even if the procedures for membership are changed, the concept could be kept as a mentoring system like the one you propose. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy, Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100325002358.gd13...@kunpuu.plessy.org
