Mike Doty wrote: [Wed Sep 07 2005, 12:16:29AM EDT]
>In the end, I've read 20+ emails today on this thread, which we at
>best "I don't like this", and at worst, "devrel is a conspiracy!",
>yet no one has offered a solution. Put up or shut up. My
>recommendation would be to merge the two groups, by expanding the
>panel of "judges" from 3-5 to 5-7. This cuts out a lot of the red
>tape and improves communication while still retaining a similar
>number of people involved.
I'm confused by this paragraph. Nearly all the contributors to the
thread provided arguments to back up their position. If some of the
contributors sound shocked, I think it's because they perceive
dmwaters' suggestion as gutting the recent proposal which they believe
was an important step to making devrel more effective.
The argument presented by dmwaters seems to be:
Two committees is unnecessarily complicated and requires more
people than we have. One committee per complaint should be
sufficient, and will be as impartial as possible, to the extent
that it can.
The rebuttal seems to be:
Two committees, investigative and judicial, per complaint is
necessary for checks and balances. Going back to one committee
reverts the progress made by the previous proposal.
If I'm missing something, please let me know. I don't want to leave
out a possibly-critical argument in my personal evaluation.
Personally I'm in agreement with the rebuttal. From my perspective,
the problem with one committee is that it's possible for a single
charismatic, strong-willed individual to carry the group to their
preferred conclusion. Separating investigation and judgment doesn't
solve that problem completely, but it helps to mitigate it.
If devrel has trouble staffing both committees from its ranks, then
IMHO a call should be put out to request devs to temporary fill
a role. Has that been done, and I missed it?
Gentoo Linux Developer