Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 09:38:26AM +0100, Gerardo Ballabio wrote: > >Another facet of the question is: do you think that Debian should >support and/or take action on "good causes" that aren't part of its >stated mission (and that some people, including some DDs, might >disagree on being "good")? > >For example (by no means an exhaustive list, feel free to add): >- should Debian aim to reduce its carbon footprint and/or optimize >software for that goal? >- should Debian support and/or actively drive initiatives to increase >diversity in Debian Developers, or in the software industry in >general, or in the world at large? >- should Debian take any measures (boycott, suspend or expel >developers, refuse to consider as a host for Debconf...) against >countries that are perceived by some as "behaving bad" -- as examples >related to current events let me just mention Russia and Israel? >- (this is an issue that once hit me personally) should Debian enforce >the use of a particular language with respect to gender issues? Oh, this garbage again. Haven't you learnt yet? The "thing that once hit you personally" was the thread at [1], where you declared that your rights about word choice trump being respectful of the people around you. You're continuing to frame this as "politics". I, and many other people here, have made it abundantly clear that this is not acceptable. You're (still) not a DD, but it seems that you want to continue to try and push this disrespectful world-view in the project. This is elementary stuff - it's point #1 in the Debian Code of Conduct. [2] As you've made it clear that you don't want to abide by the norms of our community, I strongly suggest that you go and find a different place where your views might fit better. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2019/12/msg00011.html [2] https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com “Why do people find DNS so difficult? It’s just cache invalidation and naming things.” -– Jeff Waugh (https://twitter.com/jdub) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 09:38:26AM +0100, Gerardo Ballabio wrote: I would point out to the candidates that Gerardo is not a voting member of the Debian project. I don't think we should allow our candidate discussions to be hijacked by non-voters. -- 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 Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
I find even calling asking for a stance on wording regarding "gender issues" disrespectful.If you just respect everyone for who they are, using gender neutral language follows automatically. Because it's the only way to be inclusive to all genders and orientations (no matter if people are male, female non-binary, straight, homosexual, asexual or whatever way they feel to be themselves). Funnily, I've never find someone trans trying to force a change of gender onto others. The only people I ever ran into trying to force others to live their lives in a specific way where heterosexual non-trans (aka cis) people. Thankfully a minority, though an extremely vocal one.Live your life the way you want. But don't try to force others to live theirs like you want them to.Kind regards,SvenPS: this means that I think you replied to the wrong person. Rhonda's response was respectful, the mail she replied to wasn't.
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On 3/22/24 21:29, Soren Stoutner wrote: On Friday, March 22, 2024 3:08:53 AM MST Rhonda D'Vine wrote: Unfortunately you still are hung up on your discriminatory and downright disrespectful position that you brought up in 2019 already, haven't learned from the discussion, and still seem to find a way that the Code of Conduct wouldn't apply to you, nor the DFSG#5. I feel very strongly that these types of discussions do not belong in Debian. There are many good causes in the world and much disagreement about what they are. For Debian to succeed, it needs to focus on producing a quality software distribution. Discussions about tangentially related controversial topics, no matter how good the cause may be, doesn’t result in any benefit to those causes but does result in harm to Debian. The animosity in the previous email is representative of this (I have only quoted one of the paragraphs above because I do not find the tone of the message appropriate for a Debian mailing list). I discussed about my thoughts on general causes in a previous mail. But there are some topics like gender issues that are relevant to Debian. Debian is not just an operating system. It is also a community, one which declares its positive stand regarding diversity. If one does not want to participate in such discussions, they are free to not involve. But when participating, everyone should ensure that the communication is respectful to all and there is no CoC violation. OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Sruthi's platform
On 3/22/24 16:13, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote on 22/03/2024 at 09:54:35+0100: On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 06:51:48AM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: PS: I am eagerly awaiting a platform from Sruthi Chandran . Up to now there still is the old one at https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/platforms/srud . Oops: apparently I missed https://www.debian.org/vote/2024/platforms/srud . Sorry. And thanks for opening the rig: I have one question regarding Sruthi's platform. In it, it is stated that: " I would like to revisit our relationship with the existing trusted organisations, fund management procedure and if needed, explore the possibilities of having more TOs to reduce dependency on one or two. During DebConf23 organising, we had to face numerous fund distribution issues. Some of it definitely was specific to Indian scenario, but still I could think of a lot of improvement that can be done with respect to fund distribution through TOs." Being Debian France's treasurer since 2019 (dunno yet if treasurer will be my main endeavour should I be reelected this year, but I'll definitely continue to help as much as I can whatever my role becomes), I have two issues: 1. Many TOs create more liabilities: I have a certain memory of ffis eV, which disappeared with Debian assets. It's already hard to follow how things go under three TOs, so if we go to more, how do you expect to cope and avoid similar scenarii or worse? I am also aware of such disappearance. Having TOs with just 1-2 people responsible is a warning sign. We should act before it is too late. If we are going for more TOs, it would be ensured that there is a team of people and a good governing structure before committing. Regular review of the functioning of the TOs would be done and revoke agreements with TOs that shows signs of collapse. About monitoring assets in TOs, regular reporting would be set as a requirement in the agreement. DPL or may be someone delegated (Treasurers?) would have to ensure the reporting is happening regularly. These are some thoughts I have with my limited understanding of TOs and their relation with Debian. Once I have more clear picture, I might get some more ideas. 2. SPI is too centric in the TO ecosystem. I completely agree! After having spent two years in DF Treasurer, and more than 30 to 50% of my Debian dedicated time attending to it, I learnt that a) SPI takes 5% of anything it receives for Debian (Debian France does not do that and will never do that) and b) it own 90% of Debian assets while it's very slow to process much things and is reluctant to rebalance these. What's "funny" is that this situation led DebConf organizers to ask us to become the spine of DebConf registration financial aspects, as it seems despite being alone (not anymore since the end of 2022, <3 jipege) and not paid for it, I'm more reactive (and yet, some people could tell that sometimes I take far too much time, and I'd like to apologize for that) on these matters, and also keen on trying to find solutions when things go outside of the defined frame. True in my experience too. Debian France and Debian.ch had very short turn around times. So, what seems important to me is rather this aspect. How did we get here? What do we intent do to about it? Incorporating Debian is a fine idea to me, and I'd still be happy to manage Debian assets, but at some point, the dyfunctional aspect, to me, is rather the way SPI evolved and the relation that resulted from this evolution. How did we get here - I do not know. A lot of research would be needed to understand that or someone with more historic understanding could help here. Having 90% of assets in a single TO itself is not a good thing. That is like putting all the eggs in one basket. I suggested more TOs mainly to redistribute these assets. I know this would be a herculean task, but I would like to at least get it started. I do agree on your point of why things are dysfunctional. When things have evolved and things are not looking good, we should revisit the whole thing. This also is not going to be an easy task. I'd like to hear both your feelings on this, and I'd really appreciate to get Jonathan's insights on this, too, as he did the DPL job for a long time and might have clues I don't have and failed to get from him (bc he's busy) over IRC chat. Thanks OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
* Soren Stoutner [2024-03-22 16:59:46 CET]: > On Friday, March 22, 2024 3:08:53 AM MST Rhonda D'Vine wrote: > > Unfortunately you still are hung up on your discriminatory and downright > > disrespectful position that you brought up in 2019 already, haven't learned > > from the discussion, and still seem to find a way that the Code of Conduct > > wouldn't apply to you, nor the DFSG#5. > > I feel very strongly that these types of discussions do not belong in Debian. > Agreed. There shouldn't be a need to even discuss the basic human dignity and respect for the existence of trans or inter* people. > There are many good causes in the world and much disagreement about what they > are. For Debian to succeed, it needs to focus on producing a quality > software > distribution. Discussions about tangentially related controversial topics, > no > matter how good the cause may be, doesn’t result in any benefit to those > causes > but does result in harm to Debian. We though need people to work on the distribution. And if we are activly driving people away by not standing up for basic human rights to exist and dignity there won't be any left besides those that don't care about decency in communication with each other. > The animosity in the previous email is representative of this (I have only > quoted one of the paragraphs above because I do not find the tone of the > message appropriate for a Debian mailing list). You quoted the wrong mail. I "just" stood up for basic human decency. It is a privilege that it doesn't affect you personally, and you don't seem to care, but the project shouldn't ignore disrespectful points of view driven by ideology that is attributed a genocidial character by the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention[1]. [1] https://www.lemkininstitute.com/statements-new-page/statement-on-the-genocidal-nature-of-the-gender-critical-movement%E2%80%99s-ideology-and-practice The Debian project has a clear standing on human rights - not just within its requirements for Software Licences but also in practice in the way we interact, and actually has to defend and stand up for them when challenged. I would suggest you to read into the Paradox of Tolerance. If a tolerant and inclusive community like the Debian project isn't willing to stand up against intolerance, the tolerance will vanish. So long, Rhonda -- Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los | Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los| Wir sind Helden Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los|
Re: Question to candidates: How much available time would you have for DPL work?
On 3/22/24 15:47, Nilesh Patra wrote: I have worked with both Andreas and Sruthi in some capacity in different teams so I have some idea about about the turn-around time for both (usually quick). In Debian, responding to something in around a week is normal (anf good), however, some DPL tasks would likely come out as urgent+important and would require you to revert within 24h. When something is urgent, turnaround within a day or so should be possible for me. Ping me on IRC and matrix, just in case something is to be done in lesser than one day. While I was answering this question, a thought came to mind. Sending mails to leader@ classified as URGENCY - Low, Medium, High could have better response time. The leader@ inbox would be overflowing with messages and identifying the urgency will make things efficient. How effectively do you think you'd manage something like this? Do you also intend to change something w/ respect to the current time you're spending on Debian? Do you intend to re-org the time you spend into technical work (for andreas) or outreach/community/AM team activity (for srud) into DPL tasks? I would be definitely increasing my Debian time. Also, most of my current activities are in delegated teams from which I will be released if I become DPL. So I will have that time too. Best, Nilesh OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Question to candidates: new legal entity for Debian worldwide
On 3/22/24 11:21, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: Hi, There has been discussion of having one new legal entity representing the Debian project worldwide. What are the candidates opinions on that? I am interested in the idea of having a legal entity for Debian. Till a year back, I was not in favor of having such an entity. But some of my experiences, especially during DebConf23 made me rethink. I still think there are numerous pros for not having a legal entity, but there are cons too. When we have to deal with an external organization, or when having a legal battle or when interacting with Government entities etc, having a legal standing makes things easier. But with the legal standing comes the problems of bureaucracy, reporting, jurisdiction etc. The decision to register Debian should not be taken in haste. There is a history of great communities going dormant after legal registration - burdened by extensive reporting required or with non-functional officials. If we ever end up registering, the by-law should be written with great care to maintain the unique and efficient ways of functioning we currently have in Debian. The whole process of registering Debian as legal entity should a GR with good amount of discussion. OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Question to candidates: How do you plan to manage finances/accounting?
On 3/22/24 09:23, Nilesh Patra wrote: I am interested in knowing about what the current candidates think about accounting bits in Debian and how they think about spending the money. I think the money should be spent based on the evaluation of cost to benefit ratio. As I have read and from time to time observed, the finances in the project do not have a lot of transparency and there are updates posted semi-occasionally on -private and sometimes in DPL talks. Jonathan also wrote about it in one of their previous campaigns. Itd also be good to know if there's a plan on where the budget shall be best spent. While I believe that deciding in advance where to spend and where not to spend money in advance is not a great idea in our context. If there is a fixed amount of money to be spent in a year, distributing under various budget headers would be a good idea. But in Debian, it is not the case. Some years, there will be more expenditure and some years not much. Only plan I right now have is to revisit the diversity budget and how to increase the efficiency. My money spending decisions will be based on "does the outcome justify the expenditure". I agree on your point of lack of transparency about the finances. But from what I understood from highvoltage's platform last year, the problem is more to do with the current delayed, manual and tedious accounting process. Now I do not have access to the accounting process, but once I have access, I would definitely spend some time to evaluate if a better process can be implemented. I would try my best to have transparency in finances (at least on -private). I would like to know if the candidates for this term have any plans about it or any thoughts in general. Both of your platforms have only a (very) vague idea about it and I'd like to know more specifics about it. I know my answer here also does not have much specifics, it is because I prefer a case to case decision rather than a general decision. PS: I urge _only_ the candidates to reply to this mail Best, Nilesh OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On 3/20/24 00:31, Paulo Henrique de Lima Santana wrote: Hi Andreas, Em 19/03/2024 11:46, Andreas Tille escreveu: If this question is whether we should target for less power consumption I consider this topic as perfectly non-controversal and part of our mission statement. I can't imagine any user wants to spent more money on energy to run a Debian system or might be happy about seeking for the next power plug to recharge the laptop battery. Probably also people who do not believe in the need to reduce the carbon footprint will be interested in less energy consumption and I consider this as part of our mission statement. In your page, you wrote: "I would encourage everyone to minimize air travel whenever possible. Fortunately, I've noticed a tendency among Debian community members to prefer land travel over flights anyway." How about travels between continents, and traveks in regions/continents without the same train network you have there in Europe? I think opting for reduced air travel (and/or carbon footprint) should be a personal decision and not DPL's. But what I, as DPL, would do is to evaluate if the "cost" of travel is proportional to the benefit of travel. I hope my platform was clear enough that I'm in favour of increasing the diversity in Debian. I read you page yesterday but I would like to know what ideias do you have to increase gender representation and geographic diversity? I'm sure everybody is in favor to increase diversity, but what can be done in practice? Some ideas I have are: * more focused spending of diversity budget to ensure the benefits reach eligible people * having a delegated team focusing on diversity * bring to limelight the diversity we already have. People from under-represented groups will free comfortable joining the community if they know there are similar people in the community already. * getting Debian local groups more active to increase Geographical diversity Best regards, OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On 3/19/24 14:08, Gerardo Ballabio wrote: Andreas Tille wrote: How would you as a DPL try to lead a community that focuses on producing a great distribution without getting divided on controversial topics? I'm not really sure in how far you consider the first statement relevant to the question. If your focus is on political controverses I have a clear statement: Make sure off-topic messages will be reduced to a bare minimum on Debian channels (maximum is one message to invite people to a non-Debian channel and mark this invitation [OT]). Limiting off-topic posts is obviously agreeable, but there's more than just that. Another facet of the question is: do you think that Debian should support and/or take action on "good causes" that aren't part of its stated mission (and that some people, including some DDs, might disagree on being "good")? I agree that our focus should be on Debian OS, Debian community and Free Software ecosystem etc. But if someone wants to do something for general "good causes", as long as it is not creating trouble for others or violating CoC or social contract etc should be fine. Ours is the "do-cracy" culture and I think we can apply that here too. For example (by no means an exhaustive list, feel free to add): - should Debian aim to reduce its carbon footprint and/or optimize software for that goal? For reducing carbon footprint, not doing any in-person events is not a good idea, but anyone can organize online events in addition to regular events. Similarly there is no harm in doing some software optimization as long as someone is willing to do that. - should Debian support and/or actively drive initiatives to increase diversity in Debian Developers, or in the software industry in general, or in the world at large? I strongly believe that increasing diversity should be a focus area under Debian community. This in my opinion is not a "general good cause", rather a very essential part of the community aspect of Debian. - should Debian take any measures (boycott, suspend or expel developers, refuse to consider as a host for Debconf...) against countries that are perceived by some as "behaving bad" -- as examples related to current events let me just mention Russia and Israel? Discriminating contributors based on their country is not a good idea. Regarding DebConf hosts, there is an additional aspect to it - safety. The city selected to host DebConf should be safe to everyone in our community. - (this is an issue that once hit me personally) should Debian enforce the use of a particular language with respect to gender issues? We should collectively ensure that the language used (not just for gender issues) in all of our communication is welcoming. Anything violating or on the verge of violating CoC is not good for the community as a whole. Gerardo OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On 3/10/24 21:06, Thomas Koch wrote: A question to DPL candidates It seems (to me?) that more and more areas of our lives become political and controversies on such topics more aggressive. Or people stop talking with each other. Personally, I believe that there is politics in every aspect of our life. For instance, using or contributing to Debian itself is a political statement. I do not consider Debian to be "just" a technical project, it has its social and political aspects too. How would you as a DPL try to lead a community that focuses on producing a great distribution without getting divided on controversial topics? When there are hundreds of people with clear opinions discussing something, there will definitely be disagreements. What we should focus is how we can agree to disagree and collaborate amicably. We have a good Code of Conduct in place and I would be OK with constructive discussions as long as it does not go in the direction of violating the CoC. About off-topic discussions, minimizing them would be great for everyone and anyone can divert these threads to appropriate lists. Thomas Koch (I hope it's not violating rules to pre-post a question before the campaign period?) OpenPGP_0xC7EA1BE1574DED5D.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
On Friday, March 22, 2024 3:08:53 AM MST Rhonda D'Vine wrote: > Unfortunately you still are hung up on your discriminatory and downright > disrespectful position that you brought up in 2019 already, haven't learned > from the discussion, and still seem to find a way that the Code of Conduct > wouldn't apply to you, nor the DFSG#5. I feel very strongly that these types of discussions do not belong in Debian. There are many good causes in the world and much disagreement about what they are. For Debian to succeed, it needs to focus on producing a quality software distribution. Discussions about tangentially related controversial topics, no matter how good the cause may be, doesn’t result in any benefit to those causes but does result in harm to Debian. The animosity in the previous email is representative of this (I have only quoted one of the paragraphs above because I do not find the tone of the message appropriate for a Debian mailing list). -- Soren Stoutner so...@debian.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Question to candidates: How much available time would you have for DPL work?
Hi Nilesh, Am Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 03:47:08PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra: > I have worked with both Andreas and Sruthi in some capacity in different teams I'm hereby use the chance to thank you again for your great work increasing my personal time for other things quite a lot. ;-) > so I have some idea about about the turn-around time for both (usually quick). > > In Debian, responding to something in around a week is normal (anf good), > however, some > DPL tasks would likely come out as urgent+important and would require > you to revert within 24h. Usually I should be able to respond in 24h. However, my plan is to delay important DPL statements *intentionally* to 1. Consult trusted and experienced DDs about the topic 2. Sleep over it > How effectively do you think you'd manage something like this? I can't seriously answer this question in advance. > Do you also intend to change something w/ respect to the current time you're > spending > on Debian? I plan a massive change in my Debian work to shift from uploading and bug fixing to DPL tasks. > Do you intend to re-org the time you spend into technical work (for andreas) I have informed the attendees of Debian Med sprint *before* I even was drafting my platform. I'm observing some increased dedication inside the team and I'm as well happy as thankful for this. I wrote some e-mail to Debian R team[1]. I admit I consider the R-pkg team as non-functional since I'm de-facto the only uploader[2] (since Dirk E. does not consider himself a team member and his uploads are not the team maintained packages). I'm concerned about the fact that there is very low response to my mail. We definitely need some contributor who takes over routine-uploads to keep the R stack up to date. > or outreach/community/AM team activity (for srud) into DPL tasks? To be honest: This is a question I had to myself several times and I really hope that my answer is not to strongly in contrast to reality. Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2024/03/msg0.html [2] http://blends.debian.net/liststats/uploaders_r-pkg.png -- https://fam-tille.de
Re: Sruthi's platform (was: Re: Question to candidates: new legal entity for Debian worldwide)
Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote on 22/03/2024 at 09:54:35+0100: > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 06:51:48AM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: >> > >> PS: I am eagerly awaiting a platform from >> Sruthi Chandran . Up to now there still is the old one at >> https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/platforms/srud . > > Oops: apparently I missed https://www.debian.org/vote/2024/platforms/srud . > Sorry. And thanks for opening the rig: I have one question regarding Sruthi's platform. In it, it is stated that: " I would like to revisit our relationship with the existing trusted organisations, fund management procedure and if needed, explore the possibilities of having more TOs to reduce dependency on one or two. During DebConf23 organising, we had to face numerous fund distribution issues. Some of it definitely was specific to Indian scenario, but still I could think of a lot of improvement that can be done with respect to fund distribution through TOs." Being Debian France's treasurer since 2019 (dunno yet if treasurer will be my main endeavour should I be reelected this year, but I'll definitely continue to help as much as I can whatever my role becomes), I have two issues: 1. Many TOs create more liabilities: I have a certain memory of ffis eV, which disappeared with Debian assets. It's already hard to follow how things go under three TOs, so if we go to more, how do you expect to cope and avoid similar scenarii or worse? 2. SPI is too centric in the TO ecosystem. After having spent two years in DF Treasurer, and more than 30 to 50% of my Debian dedicated time attending to it, I learnt that a) SPI takes 5% of anything it receives for Debian (Debian France does not do that and will never do that) and b) it own 90% of Debian assets while it's very slow to process much things and is reluctant to rebalance these. What's "funny" is that this situation led DebConf organizers to ask us to become the spine of DebConf registration financial aspects, as it seems despite being alone (not anymore since the end of 2022, <3 jipege) and not paid for it, I'm more reactive (and yet, some people could tell that sometimes I take far too much time, and I'd like to apologize for that) on these matters, and also keen on trying to find solutions when things go outside of the defined frame. So, what seems important to me is rather this aspect. How did we get here? What do we intent do to about it? Incorporating Debian is a fine idea to me, and I'd still be happy to manage Debian assets, but at some point, the dyfunctional aspect, to me, is rather the way SPI evolved and the relation that resulted from this evolution. I'd like to hear both your feelings on this, and I'd really appreciate to get Jonathan's insights on this, too, as he did the DPL job for a long time and might have clues I don't have and failed to get from him (bc he's busy) over IRC chat. Thanks -- PEB signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Question to candidates: How do you plan to manage finances/accounting?
Quoting Andreas Tille: > Am Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 09:23:12AM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra: > > I am interested in knowing about what the current candidates think about > > accounting bits in Debian and how they think about spending the money. > > I admit my knowledge about how Debian money is spent is currently low > and incomplete. Same here :D > Here is a list of things I know / have heard about: > >1. DebConf (and MiniDebConfs) > In my perception the money usage for DebConf is transparet enough > I have no idea about MiniDebConfs. > >2. Smaller in person meetings (Bug squashing parties, team sprints) > Sprint organisers have to estimate their budget and need confirmation. > Confirmed budget is payed. > I have no idea whether those data are published somewhere. > >3. Infrasturture hardware > I was always happy to see that it worked from my mere developer > point of view and did not read the reports about this but I > know there are some reports. > >4. Hardware for developers > I once profited from a Debian sponsored laptop in exchange for some > review[1]. I know that other DDs also got hardware which is for > different reasons interesing to make sure Debian runs properly. > I have no idea whether there is some list about this (in terms of > transparent usage of the money) > >5. There is probably way more missing in this list. > > > As I have read and from time to time observed, the finances in the project > > do not have a lot of transparency and there are updates posted > > semi-occasionally > > on -private and sometimes in DPL talks. Jonathan also wrote about it in one > > of their > > previous campaigns. > > I would love to be transparent about money. Currently I have no idea > how time consuming this process compared to DPL tasks in general might > be. I'd love to get help here which is also a way to increase > transparency if more eyes are looking onto this topic. > > > Itd also be good to know if there's a plan on where the budget > > shall be best spent. > > I have no idea how to measure "best" usage objectively. I strongly > believe that in person meetings are very important so I consider the > money for item 1. and 2. of my list above spent well and would encourage > people to organise those events which should be supported by Debian > money. > > Its probably without question that we need good infrastructure hardware. > If bottlenecks might be spotted which can be fixed quickly with existing > money I'm all for it. > > > I would like to know if the candidates for this term have any plans about > > it or any thoughts > > in general. > > In general I think that people donating money to Debian expect their > money to be spent for the progress of Debian (rather than filling up > our bank account[2]). > > I'm also open to exploring new ways to allocate funds. I'm hopeful that > we can derive some positive insights from the Debian Developer's Survey > on the Usage of Money in Debian[3]. Personally, I'm open to discussing > whether to compensate contributors for important tasks that either > nobody wants to do or lacks people with sufficient time capacity to > undertake those tasks. I recall the various pros and cons raised during > past discussions on this matter, but if people believe it's time to > initiate a fresh discussion, I'm very receptive to that. > > BTW, I don't believe that only the DPL can initiate such a discussion. > But for sure I'm very open for suggestions and will support any > initiative to make Debian better. In principle yes, but it is finally upto DPL to approve most of the things about payments. > As a very personal note what I think about money: In my eyes money has > a great power to divide people. Discussion about it is usually heated > and it is hard to find a good consensus due to very different > perspectives onto that matter specifically since there is hardly a > technical proof what is right and what is wrong. This makes a great > difference to other decisions we have to draw inside Debian. > > > Both of your platforms have only a (very) vague idea about it and I'd like > > to know more > > specifics about it. > > If you want to know more details please be more specific in your > question. No, your answer is really good and answers most of what I wanted to know. Since we are yet to find out more details about accounting, I suppose you'd be able to grok the same in more details if you are elected. I'd bring up this topic again if I feel there's a need for more transparency and detailing -- maybe after a few months or so. > > PS: I urge _only_ the candidates to reply to this mail > > I'm personally interested into specific proposal how people consider > money well spent and might answer these in different treads (since > Nilesh wants only replies from candidates).
Question to candidates: How much available time would you have for DPL work?
I have worked with both Andreas and Sruthi in some capacity in different teams so I have some idea about about the turn-around time for both (usually quick). In Debian, responding to something in around a week is normal (anf good), however, some DPL tasks would likely come out as urgent+important and would require you to revert within 24h. How effectively do you think you'd manage something like this? Do you also intend to change something w/ respect to the current time you're spending on Debian? Do you intend to re-org the time you spend into technical work (for andreas) or outreach/community/AM team activity (for srud) into DPL tasks? Best, Nilesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Candidates question: politics and Debian
* Gerardo Ballabio [2024-03-19 09:38:26 CET]: > Another facet of the question is: do you think that Debian should > support and/or take action on "good causes" that aren't part of its > stated mission (and that some people, including some DDs, might > disagree on being "good")? Extending the DFSG towards interacting with actual people in the project (especially #5, #6), not just licenses, should actually be a non-brainer, but seemingly it isn't. So here we are again. > For example (by no means an exhaustive list, feel free to add): > - should Debian aim to reduce its carbon footprint and/or optimize > software for that goal? Given that the climate change disproportional affects people in certain areas, I would draw a connection to DFSG#5 and #6. > - should Debian support and/or actively drive initiatives to increase > diversity in Debian Developers, or in the software industry in > general, or in the world at large? Diversity in the software we support within the project is a key factor. And diverse needs and approaches to things root in diverse background of people. Ignoring that there are systematic issues within the project playing into the underrepresentation of a demography in our community, this is tightly connected to DFSG#5 "No discrimination against persons or groups". > - should Debian take any measures (boycott, suspend or expel > developers, refuse to consider as a host for Debconf...) against > countries that are perceived by some as "behaving bad" -- as examples > related to current events let me just mention Russia and Israel? I wonder why you left out Italy with its fascist Meloni. I might have an idea on the why, but that's a different topic. Helding inhabitants of countries responsible for their governance is off-limits. The reason why the debconf in israel was canceled was due to safety concerns in current affairs and by far not connected to the developers there, and I am very disturbed by your implication in that statement. > - (this is an issue that once hit me personally) should Debian enforce > the use of a particular language with respect to gender issues? What you call "gender issues" is a downright discriminatory issue against trans people, denying the existence of intersex people, and claiming that chromosomes would be something you can see when you look at someone. On that grounds, I have to thank you for your downright disrespectful statements in 2019. It allowed me to create a poetry slam text out of it, got nominated for local championship because of it, and had it printed in a trans focus anthology. So while your claims are scientific nonsense, I still have to thank you for the indirect elevation of me in that field. Unfortunately you still are hung up on your discriminatory and downright disrespectful position that you brought up in 2019 already, haven't learned from the discussion, and still seem to find a way that the Code of Conduct wouldn't apply to you, nor the DFSG#5. Cheers, Rhonda -- Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los | Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los| Wir sind Helden Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los|
Re: Question to candidates: new legal entity for Debian worldwide
Hi Joost, Am Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 06:51:48AM +0100 schrieb Joost van Baal-Ilić: > There has been discussion of having one new legal entity representing > the Debian project worldwide. What are the candidates opinions on that? Could you please add some pointers to recent discussions about this. I've found some 20 year old thread[1]. Our constitution says: SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. I've also found some discussion about the legal entity of DebConf in past years[3]. My guess is you are not refering to any of those points. Any pointers to recent discussion are welcome. I'm aware about the EU legislation regarding Cyber Resilience Act, Product Liability Directive and CSAM Regulation but I have no idea whether our answer should be becoming a legal entity. Its as always in Debian: We are a Do-o-cracy. The person who does the job can decide what gets done. Those who really strongly believe that a legal entity is the answer to major problems in Debian might run this effort, find consensus to run a GR changing the consitution - whatever seems to be necessary. If we do not find competent volunteers this will not happen. Personally I decided to become a physicst and not a lawyer since I consider the laws of physics simple, easy to describe and perfectly able to verify in practice. This is all very distinct to the laws we have given ourself in society and I'm no expert in the latter. Thus I simply feel not comfortable in giving statements about things I do not full understand. I personally see and (hopefully) understand lots of technical problems which I would like to tackle. Since the time I can dedicate to the job is not unlimited I will decide to do things I feel competent and thus more efficient. I will not stop others solving additional problems and if those people manage to convince me that it is important for Debian I might support this. Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00647.html [2] https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.en.html#item-9 [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/04/msg00070.html > PS: I am eagerly awaiting a platform from > Sruthi Chandran . Up to now there still is the old one at > https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/platforms/srud . https://www.debian.org/vote/2024/platforms/srud -- https://fam-tille.de
Sruthi's platform (was: Re: Question to candidates: new legal entity for Debian worldwide)
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 06:51:48AM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > > PS: I am eagerly awaiting a platform from > Sruthi Chandran . Up to now there still is the old one at > https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/platforms/srud . Oops: apparently I missed https://www.debian.org/vote/2024/platforms/srud . Sorry. >
Re: Question to candidates: How do you plan to manage finances/accounting?
Hi Nilesh, Am Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 09:23:12AM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra: > I am interested in knowing about what the current candidates think about > accounting bits in Debian and how they think about spending the money. I admit my knowledge about how Debian money is spent is currently low and incomplete. Here is a list of things I know / have heard about: 1. DebConf (and MiniDebConfs) In my perception the money usage for DebConf is transparet enough I have no idea about MiniDebConfs. 2. Smaller in person meetings (Bug squashing parties, team sprints) Sprint organisers have to estimate their budget and need confirmation. Confirmed budget is payed. I have no idea whether those data are published somewhere. 3. Infrasturture hardware I was always happy to see that it worked from my mere developer point of view and did not read the reports about this but I know there are some reports. 4. Hardware for developers I once profited from a Debian sponsored laptop in exchange for some review[1]. I know that other DDs also got hardware which is for different reasons interesing to make sure Debian runs properly. I have no idea whether there is some list about this (in terms of transparent usage of the money) 5. There is probably way more missing in this list. > As I have read and from time to time observed, the finances in the project > do not have a lot of transparency and there are updates posted > semi-occasionally > on -private and sometimes in DPL talks. Jonathan also wrote about it in one > of their > previous campaigns. I would love to be transparent about money. Currently I have no idea how time consuming this process compared to DPL tasks in general might be. I'd love to get help here which is also a way to increase transparency if more eyes are looking onto this topic. > Itd also be good to know if there's a plan on where the budget > shall be best spent. I have no idea how to measure "best" usage objectively. I strongly believe that in person meetings are very important so I consider the money for item 1. and 2. of my list above spent well and would encourage people to organise those events which should be supported by Debian money. Its probably without question that we need good infrastructure hardware. If bottlenecks might be spotted which can be fixed quickly with existing money I'm all for it. > I would like to know if the candidates for this term have any plans about it > or any thoughts > in general. In general I think that people donating money to Debian expect their money to be spent for the progress of Debian (rather than filling up our bank account[2]). I'm also open to exploring new ways to allocate funds. I'm hopeful that we can derive some positive insights from the Debian Developer's Survey on the Usage of Money in Debian[3]. Personally, I'm open to discussing whether to compensate contributors for important tasks that either nobody wants to do or lacks people with sufficient time capacity to undertake those tasks. I recall the various pros and cons raised during past discussions on this matter, but if people believe it's time to initiate a fresh discussion, I'm very receptive to that. BTW, I don't believe that only the DPL can initiate such a discussion. But for sure I'm very open for suggestions and will support any initiative to make Debian better. As a very personal note what I think about money: In my eyes money has a great power to divide people. Discussion about it is usually heated and it is hard to find a good consensus due to very different perspectives onto that matter specifically since there is hardly a technical proof what is right and what is wrong. This makes a great difference to other decisions we have to draw inside Debian. > Both of your platforms have only a (very) vague idea about it and I'd like to > know more > specifics about it. If you want to know more details please be more specific in your question. > PS: I urge _only_ the candidates to reply to this mail I'm personally interested into specific proposal how people consider money well spent and might answer these in different treads (since Nilesh wants only replies from candidates). > Best, > Nilesh Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://fam-tille.de/debian/frame.work.html [2] https://www.theregister.com/2020/09/10/debian_project_address/ [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/04/msg1.html -- https://fam-tille.de
Question to candidates: new legal entity for Debian worldwide
Hi, There has been discussion of having one new legal entity representing the Debian project worldwide. What are the candidates opinions on that? Bye, Joost PS: I am eagerly awaiting a platform from Sruthi Chandran . Up to now there still is the old one at https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/platforms/srud .
