New Delegation: tag2upload delegates

[Thorsten Glaser]

Task description

There should be something in this that says that they need to do so
in a way that matches ftpmaster policies.

bye,
//mirabilos
--=20
15:41=E2=8E=9C<Lo-lan-do:#fusionforge> Somebody write a testsuite for hello=
world :-)

[Andreas Tille]

Hi,

Post by Thorsten Glaser

Task description

There should be something in this that says that they need to do so
in a way that matches ftpmaster policies.

I gave the ftpmaster team about three weeks response time to the text of
the delegation. Do you have any specific suggestion?

BTW, any volunteers to join ftpmaster team? If yes, please contact the
team.

Kind regards
Andreas.

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

All delegates have to co-ordinate with each other. There’s no special need for this delegation to make reference to others, as josch says.
--
Sean Whitton

Please excuse top-posting and brevity. I am writing to you from a mobile phone.

Post by Andreas Tille
Hi,

Post by Thorsten Glaser

Task description

There should be something in this that says that they need to do so
in a way that matches ftpmaster policies.

I gave the ftpmaster team about three weeks response time to the text of
the delegation. Do you have any specific suggestion?
BTW, any volunteers to join ftpmaster team? If yes, please contact the
team.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
https://fam-tille.de

[Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues]

Quoting Thorsten Glaser (2025-01-15 00:50:55)

There should be something in this that says that they need to do so in a way
that matches ftpmaster policies.

Do we really need to explicitly codify "please work well together with your
fellow DDs" in the task description of delegates?

I think that this should be implicit, no?

Thanks!

cheers, josch

[Thorsten Glaser]

Post by Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
Quoting Thorsten Glaser (2025-01-15 00:50:55)

Post by Thorsten Glaser
There should be something in this that says that they need to do so
in a way that matches ftpmaster policies.

Do we really need to explicitly codify "please work well together with
your fellow DDs" in the task description of delegates?

That=E2=80=99s not what I said. What I said was, design and run the service
in a way so that ftpmaster=E2=80=99s policies on what gets into Debian and
how are honoured, i.e. have precedence in case of doubt, too.

bye,
//mirabilos
--=20
<hecker> cool ein Ada Lovelace Google-Doodle. aber zum 197. Geburtstag? H=
=C3=A4tten
die nicht noch 3 Jahre warten k=C3=B6nnen? <mirabilos> bis dahin gibts goog=
le nicht
mehr <hecker> ja, k=C3=B6nnte man meinen. wahrscheinlich ist der angek=C3=
=BCndigte welt-
untergang aus dem maya-kalender die globale abschaltung von google =E2=98=
=BA und darum
m=C3=BCssen die die doodles vorher noch raushauen

[G. Branden Robinson]

Post by Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
Quoting Thorsten Glaser (2025-01-15 00:50:55)

Post by Thorsten Glaser
There should be something in this that says that they need to do so
in a way that matches ftpmaster policies.

Do we really need to explicitly codify "please work well together
with your fellow DDs" in the task description of delegates?

That’s not what I said.

No indeed.

What I said was, design and run the service in a way so that
ftpmaster’s policies on what gets into Debian and how are honoured,
i.e. have precedence in case of doubt, too.

Right. But that's not the Debian Way. Or rather, doing it that way is
_precisely_ the Debian Way. Making it official...that's more contested.

A naïf would read Debian's Social Contract and Constitution, at least as
of its form up to 2007,[1] and conclude that organizationally, we have a
severe allergy to hierarchy.

In practice, we have tiers both outside the community of Debian
Developers officially constituted, with Sponsored Maintainers and Debian
Maintainers, and, increasingly, within--witness the current struggle to
establish "officially cooperative" developers (doubleplusgood!) who use
Gitlab exclusively for package maintenance, and unofficially "jerkass"
developers who maintain packages in any other way.[2]

I reckon that, like the proposal and ratification of the Debian
Constitution itself, the DM GR was an unwelcome development in the eyes
of those who saw the Debian Project as a "do-ocracy", wherein one does
essentially whatever one can get away with, with the only governing
principle being one's own "character", meaning one's sense of
self-restraint.

The vulnerability of such an informal process to social engineering
attacks, extortion, or other forms of pressure (like direction from a
manager at one's employer), is, in the eyes of some, preferable to
having to operate within a rule-based system.

That's the hill James Troup chose to metaphorically die upon--better
dead than delegated to. I note with interest the continuing tension
between the "core team"/"commit bit"/"ftpmaster" approach to governance
and the "constitutional"/"rule-based"/"legalistic" one.

I need an anthropologist to teach me how to sort out the parameters of
this struggle. Does Biella Coleman have a Ph.D. student who needs a
thesis topic?

Regards,
Branden

[1] https://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_003
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/8