Sean Whitton <[email protected]> writes: > I'm not sure it is sustainable to hold such a central role in the > project as the DFSG delegates do, and not engage with our primary > means of communication. At the same time, I don't feel free to say > that all delegates *must* be on debian-devel or something like that. > > Maybe we need to set some expectations here -- that all delegates need > to make it clear the venue in which they'd like to receive feedback > (in this case, it seems to be salsa issues).
I'm certainly in favour of this. When accepting a Project delegation role, I think we should expect communication channel to that delegate is well-known and easily discoverable, and routinely honoured by the delegate. My preference would be for such communication channel to be a Debian-infrastructure mailing list, chosen by the *team* (not individually) and advertised as such in an obvious location for all teams (maybe the Debian website, or wiki, or the like). A person, even one who is unfamiliar with Debian's conventions and quirks, who needs to communicate with the delegate team, should not need to hunt aimlessly for how to do that, it should IMO be part of team delegation that such communication is straightforwardly discoverable by any such person. -- \ “Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so | `\ why should they care about it?” —Thomas Hesse, Sony BMG, 2006 | _o__) | Ben Finney
