About my post about the DPL vote
Some people have asked me why I voted that way. Here are some pointers.
And of course various irc talks, other maillist postings and many other sources
Giving pointers is not giving rationale of your choices. Is Wouter highly ranked because he organized the booth at Fosdem ? or because of his platform ?
Your reasoning based mainly on things you didn’t like does not match my perception of the DPL election. I prefer voting based on projects and the ability of the given person to help the project… focalizing on only one aspect is not very interesting. I try to appreciate the projects of the candidates with respect to the whole project and not only myself.
Some of the pointers are pointing to what I would describe as ‘very bad judgement’ of people in debian. I haven’t since seen any reasonings why those should have changed. Like the first link to a AJ post on -project.
And some high-profile DD’s behaving like elephants in a china shop. (a so called experiment)
The people who have been ranked high is mainly because of my general impression of the candidates. While being quite active on some irc channels, I have seen much positive about many of the candidates – most people are quite friendly. Some people I have even worked with on some projects.
You ask specific about Wouter. I had a very positive impression of him from the maillists and the irc channels – and then I had the chance to speak quite much with him at Fosdem – which confirmed my positive impressions.
I don’t consider the platforms very important, as anyone can write anything in them – I vote more based on past experience. The only real important thing in the platform was that Sam showed himself as ‘Serious Sam’ – and not as a joke candidate as many people seemed to think.
While Dunc-Tank was maybe ‚very bad judgement‚ of some people in debian, some forms of protest against Dunc-Tank showed definitely ‚very bad judgement‚ too. What was the big idea behind initiating a GR to recall the DPL? Why did the protesters post a flame-bait protest statement in the d-d-a list?
(To be fair, the protesters also found a constructive way to oppose Dunc-Tank: by improving the QA in etch via Dunc-Bank. But their passive-aggressive actions far outweigh the positive efforts.)
The whole Dunc-Tank mess caught a lot of negative media attention and caused many debian users to jump the ship into ubuntu and other distros where this kind of public flame-wars are unheard of. And this happened on the eve of the etch release when debian was just about to show the world how much amazing work and skill has gone into debian since the sarge release.
Thanks to this awful f*cked-up mess, debian is now widely regarded as a sinking ship. Do any of you developers ever read the Debian Social Contract? It says: “We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities.”
Sam Hocevar seems to be one of those DDs who signed the irresponsible d-d-a protest statement against Dunc-Tank, but he’s number one in your list of DPL candidates. How come? Do you really think he has no responsibility at all in this SNAFU?
Laika (a very unhappy debian user)
Short answer: I think dunc-tank is created in hell.
I prefer people showing their dislikings loudly trying to make debian better over people silently leaving debian.
I have a couple of friends being active in other free software projects – and others have about the same amount of flamefests as debian. The biggest difference is that debian’s is much more public – try see the social contract you read – point 3 – we will not hide our problems. If people want a distribution that hides their internal problems they should go somewhere else.
About the mail to d-d-a – it is certainly a plus in my book that Sam is there.
I try to tell people who I dislike quite explicitly ;)