On 18/12/15 14:48, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Le jeudi, 17 décembre 2015, 12.49:32 Gunnar Wolf a écrit : >> As Didier said already replying to Steve, I am among the people >> responding "yes" to the call. There is one bit that I do feel >> important: We can reach a consensus as to which bid is more apt in our >> eyes, but formally, we don't have a delegated body to make things >> formal. > > I think we can act according to the pre-existing rules, and that we > should. > > From https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Bid_process#Venue_decision: >> The DebConf Committee is made up of the delegated DebConf chairs and >> additional members recruited by the Chairs from those with a long-term >> interest in helping organise DebConf. > > Without delegated DebConf chairs, this boils down to "additional members > recruited by the Chairs". By checking with the actual members of the > DebConf Committee (as recruited by past Chairs), we only shrink it, and > don't engage in actual recruitement [0]. > > Given the general "DebConf Team" situation, I would really like us to > focus on using the existing structures for what they got built, rather > than having meta-discussions, which will only delay the DC17 decision. I > don't see value in postponing the DC17 decision until after the DebConf > governance tensions have been relaxed. >
As the introduction says on that wiki "Modifications to this process should be agreed with the competing bid teams" In principle, this would suggest that the bid teams should have some say in whether it goes ahead without the chairs, given it is such a significant decision. A more pedantic argument may be that without any delegation, there is no DebConf committee. A softer version of this argument may be that the committee is in caretaker mode, only making essential decisions to avoid DC16 unraveling. I feel there is a real danger that if this is done without the new chairs, then some people may not volunteer to participate as a chair at all, feeling that a significant decision has already been made without them and now they are just being roped in to implement it. Freezing the decision process may also be a practical way of emphasizing to the wider community that DebConf would welcome more contributions. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
