Chuck Zmudzinski wrote: > I have read much of the documentation online about how Debian understands itself, but I have never heard the term "do-ocracy" before.
As I understand, it is an informal term, as such I don't expect to find it in formal documents. I read it as meaning "those who do the work run the show". I believe that is a sensible rule for a community of volunteers. > Obviously, my proposal would need to somehow define who are the users that should be given a formal vote for GRs, the DPL, etc. I do believe that being open to listening to other people's advice is a virtue, and that the Debian project should definitely listen to its users, but I don't think that this should necessarily translate into voting rights. Besides, voting isn't always the best way to make decisions. On technical matters it is usually better to let it to those who know the subject best, and those are normally the people who routinely work on it -- which brings us back to the "do-ocracy" concept. Also, please consider that while voting rights are restricted to Debian members, discussions are usually open to everybody, so if you'd like to contribute to Debian's decision-making process, you already can. > I actually, after some fruitful discussion with some of the people on debian-user, tentatively came to the conclusion that the fact that Debian is created by volunteers is probably one of the biggest *disadvantages* of Debian software. If you could explain concisely how you came to that conclusion, I'd like to read it. My view is quite the opposite but I suppose that learning a different way of thinking about this issue may help me widen my perspective. > you get out of Debian what you put into it. In fact, I believe I received much more than I gave, and I hope I'm not alone. Gerardo
