FISL and Sacix
I am warming up for the next FISL - Porto Alegre, Brazil. Actually working on Sacix next release - a.k.a Sagui. We will have 3 mini community telecenters there where you will see Sacix running. For those who have no idea what i'm talking about - Sacix is a custom Debian distribution for labs and community telecenters that can be used to provide a full GNOME desktop for thin-clients or fat-clients and since Sacix is a profile based CDD, it has a 'desktop' based that is nothing but the Debian Etch Desktop with minor add-ons. Actually our major failures are: lack of human resources, website written in portuguese only. Sacix Sagui will have support for at least english, portuguese and spanish and (hopefully) the website will start being translated soon.

After Etch release, I plan to start a new group dedicated to merge Sacix features back to Debian (for Lenny) and act as a glue between debian-desktop supergroup, pkg-ltsp and related groups/packages e.g: dhcp server, tftp and nfs - there's a lot that needs to be done in terms of preseed friendliness on these. The good news is that the feature merge is already happening, but I'm the only person handling it directly. I'm not sure about the group name yet, but it might be Debian Sacix since "Debian Thin-Client(s)" or something similar don't really fit.

Anyway, I would be glad to see a Lenny user downloading our first ISO being able to choose not only the default desktop environment we've today but being able to select it and also the 'thin/fat client server'. In the end his server should be able to provide Debian Desktop Lenny through the lan for the clients. With Etch you need to install the default desktop environment and after that ltsp-server-standalone package, configure stuff like dhcp, nfs and run ltsp-build-client.

Get involved sending me a message!

See you during debconf! I can't wait to work IRL with some of you to improve Debian as a whole. Don't hesitate to contact me through the IRC for a bug squashing session or write new stuff from scratch. I've some plans for Debian Sacix, Utnubu, Simple-CDD, Debian Live, Ltsp and gnome-tasksel related work.

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 8 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 9 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 6 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 1 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 5 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 7 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 9 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
read more

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 2 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 7 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 3 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 6 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 5 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 8 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 4 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 6 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

A lot of people seem to post their votes onto planet these days. More so than 2 or 3 years ago. I'm still not going to post the full details, but here's my usual summary, based on the debate and the platforms.

Above None Of The Above

• Sam Hocevar - I share his view of the problems, although I don't agree with all the suggested actions. A bit quirky, but seems nice enough.
• Aigars Mahinovs - I think he could be an accountable and fair DPL. Has ideas - not all good ideas and I don't like the aim of releasing less often - but I can't see him driving on if he's getting flamed to a well-done crisp. A leader more than a ruler.
• Gustavo Franco - nice guy, but maybe I just think that because I've had more direct contact with him than other candidates recently. I agree with most of his views of the problems, except Ubuntu and the tattoo. Maybe too inexperienced for this time.
• Raphael Hertzog - I think the team model is a good idea for the size of the project now and it learns from past attempts.

Borderline

• Wouter Verhelst - I'd be voting mainly based on what I've seen of him. I don't want to vote for someone standing with a low-detail platform, as that's just scary. Even when people break promises, it's hard enough to remove them. The debate did give a bit more detail. I fear the adoption of ESR-style "authority follows responsibility" - that's just impractical for parts of the debian infrastructure.
• Simon Richter - Generally OK, but I'm worried by the cutting it fine with the platform, not posting any rebuttals and being late for the debate because one battery went flat.

Below NOTA

• Steve McIntyre - This won't surprise anyone: it's because of the manner in which the Debian UK Society retail business was started; but also the trial misadvertised as mediation of the d-i conflict. I shudder to think what social conformance tests he wants in NM.
• Anthony Towns - last year I didn't vote for this politician (while correct in one way, most DDs have never even seen me in a mediation situation and he didn't have the courage to cc me on that email) because I thought that email suggested he'd be a terrible DPL. This year, he's demonstrated how terrible and the platform and debate suggests he hasn't even noticed: he thinks he's been a successful leader, despite the recall vote. One or two interesting ideas, but not enough to overcome that. His rebuttal seems to utterly miss Sam Hocevar's point about how being not-evil (Corporate Social Responsibility, as seen in the private sector) is different from actively being good (Concern for Community, as seen in the third sector): is that being dense or devious?

So, how wrong am I this year? Is there more trouble ahead?


- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 6 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 6 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 3 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 3 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 2 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 4 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 1 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 6 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 5 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
My rationale follows, if you care... I've been pondering how to vote for well over a week, and I'm still not entirely happy that the ballot I've chosen accurately expresses my wishes, but it's the best approximation of them that I can come up with at this time. My dilemma has two parts

1. I don’t think the current office of the DPL is effective, due to how it is viewed by a significant proportion of the project (if not an outright majority), so regardless of how much I might like the goals and ideas proposed by an individual candidate I’m very pessimistic that being electing as DPL will actually bring those things to pass.
2. Much of what will make a good DPL is about how a specific set of ideas and goals will be put into action, and how interpersonal relationships between the DPL and various parties will be managed. This comes down to the personal character, experience and leadership skills of the candidate While I can form some level of an opinion about each of these aspects from mailing list archives, and IRC, etc. I don’t really feel comfortable making judgements in these areas until I’ve actually met them in real life. Too many people come across badly in the (severely limited) online communication methods we use, and are actually very decent reasonable people in real life. Out of the candidates, AJ is the only one that I’ve ever actually met and talked to.

Given these problems, my first step in choosing how to vote was to eliminate those candidates who I will rank below NOTA based on their published platforms. I have nothing personal against any of these three people, but given the other possible candidates I think that we’d be better off having another election than just electing one of these three for the sake of it.

• Wouter Verhelst - Wouter’s platform lacks any detail that tells me what he stands for or where he wants to see Debian go. Wouter’s platform also seems very conflict averse, it favours discussion and agreement over making hard decisions. I think Debian needs to make some hard decisions and the project leader needs to be someone who is able to willing handle (civilised) conflict.
• Aigars Mahinovs - Most of the topics that Aigars proposes to work on do not make my list of the most important issues for Debian to solve, and as others have pointed out, are possible better dealt with by other organisations.
• Simon Richter - Simon doesn’t actually state what he wants to achieve as DPL or where he sees Debian’s future direction as being, other than some vague hints that he is against projects that are similar to ‘dunc-tank’ and that we need a common goal. Stating what that common goal should be, would have lifted this above NOTA.

That leaves five remaining candidates:

• Anthony Towns - AJ gets my top ranking because I think that having some consistency in the DPL is a worthwhile goal. While I think that the whole Dunc-tank fiasco could have been managed much, much better, there were obviously hostile factions that would have made anything AJ did look bad. AJ’s platform seems to mostly involve him leading infrastructural improvements (good) and encouraging others to work on things that they want to see changed (also good). The one area where I possibly disagree with Anthony is around what the DPL role should look like. Anthony appears happy with the current state of the DPL office, I think that some significant changes are needed. However that’s going to require constitutional changes, so I’m not going to rank Anthony down on that basis alone.
• Steve McIntyre - Steve comes second primarily because he’s implicitly endorsed by AJ and everything that I’ve seen online related to Steve suggests that he is a level-headed, decent individual with good leadership skills. If I can’t have consistency in the DPL office via AJ, then Steve would definitely be the next choice. Steve’s platform also doesn’t contain anything that I disagree with.
• Sam Hocevar and Gustavo Franco - Sam and Gustavo are ranked equally based purely on the basis of their (relatively similar) platforms containing lots of great ideas and vision for Debian that I agree with. I don’t for a minute think that they will be able to achieve all of it, but at least by providing clear goals and a mandate for implementing them we might be able to start down the track of regaining some common purpose as a project. I have some reservations about Sam’s style based on what I’ve read in archive, but seeing as I’m giving the benefit of the doubt to people I haven’t personally met, I’m going to assume, that if elected Sam will be a great DPL.
• Rapha l Hertzog - Rapha l gets my final vote above NOTA to indicate that I support the idea of a board governing Debian, but that I don’t think his particular proposal is the correct way for the board to run. If Rapha l were to win, I wouldn’t object to him placing his suggested board in ‘office’ for the upcoming year, but I hope that a major piece of their workload would be to lead the discussion, drafting and passing of a constitutional change to replace the DPL with an elected board with rotating terms of reasonable length (2-3) years.

*yawn* It’s made me tired writing all of that out. Maybe sometime soon I should explain in more detail exactly what parts of Debian’s governance model I think need changing or maybe I need to wait until I’ve achieved a few more technical things and gained enough respect before anyone will listen to my opinions…

As I have stated here long ago, I do not really believe in the Debian Project Leader. Yes, it has an importance. Yes, it's not merely a decoration figure. But I do doubt it can really make much of a difference. I don't hold exactly the point of view I held back then, but it's still quite close ;-) Anyway...

[ 1 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 7 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 3 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 2 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 4 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 4 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 5 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 3 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 6 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above

As it's not a post I strongly believe in, with that many proposals in play, I cannot say I thoroughly reviewed each of the platforms/rebuttals/debate (I did follow them all, of course). I agree with most of what most of them propose (Sorry, Aigars, but I don't agree with you a bit ;-) ). One thing is, yes, worth noting: During the dunc-tank brouhaha, I spoke very little, but was mostly supportive of AJ's pushing a real new proposal. Why am I ranking lowish AJ, Rapha l and Steve (who were, after all, in there)? Because I did really appreciate AJ having the guts of pushing, of being brave enough to go into uncalm territories trying to change Debian. Is that the change I want? No, I don't really think so, so I'm not voting him (or Steve, as the 2IC, or Rapha l, as one of the board members) very high. And yes, one of the reasons I'm ranking Wouter first is his tendency not to be too passionate in flamefests. And, of course, not having much of a platform - Having an overly ambitious platform which would change the conception of Debian both towards the inside and towards the outside is completely unrealistic. And that's one of Aigars' cardinal sins :)

Just uploaded simple-cdd 0.3.0 to experimental, as a simple-cdd user since Sarge days, I've helped a lot Vagrant with Etch support that required a huge amount of development due to the d-i and debian-cd changes. Thanks for those who helped us with testing and patches!

If you're lost, simple-cdd is a limited though relatively easy tool to create a customized debian-installer CD. It supports multiple install profiles for your CDD project (We can ask your user which to install, you can simple have one or preseed it); You can preseed the packages that will be installed as you can do using d-i; i18n support for those who want custom Debian localized images; multiarch support; postinst support for profiles; simple-cdd-profile udeb take care about extra packages installation, it doesn't need tasksel.

So say we all!

So, I have voted after the second call for participation to Debian developers for the Debian Project Leader 2007 election. Here is my voting:
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 4 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 4 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 2 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 3 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 4 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 3 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 6 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 5 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Good luck to everyone of you.

The major problem — one of the major problems, for there are several — one of the many major problems with governing people is that of who you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize:- It is a well known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.

It’s election time, as Debian Developer I get to chose who is going to be the Debian Project Leader for the next year - but I don’t really care. If we can’t get a naturally strong leader, then I don’t think it matters at all. A naturally strong leader is one who actually leads and do so by strong consensus instead of just wanting to rule. For a naturally strong leader the election is a mere formality and he will run virtually unopposed. So my vote is:

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 1 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 1 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 1 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 1 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 1 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 1 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 1 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 1 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

What about “None of the Above” option? Isn’t that excatly what I want? No, not really. I don’t think we would be better of by not electing one of the candidates than we would by electing one of them. So “None of the Above” should be ranked equally with the others. Why vote at all? I want to make a point, as feeble as it is, which is clearly different from just being lazy. I want to show by active participation that I don’t think the election matters. Effectively a whatever option. Now go grab some beer…

The Debian project is having it s annual vote for the the post of the Project Leader, a mostly representative and medidative post. Here is my ballot:

[ 6 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 7 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 5 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 1 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 3 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 2 ] Choice 6: Rapha l Hertzog
[ 4 ] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[ 6 ] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[ 6 ] Choice 9: None Of The Above

I voted for Sam first because he has some fresh ideas and takes it not too serious after all, working on Debian should be fun. Next is Rapha l Herzog. He got the big plus of some good people on the prospective DPL board and I know he is doing some good stuff with regard to collaborative maintenance, e.g. in pkg-perl. I d then rank the current DPL and his Second in Charge equally. They didn t do anything particular bad (besides maybe the dunc-tank-experiment, but I m not blaming that failure entirely only on them), and continuity is normally a good thing. Well, just for fun, I ll give the advantage to Steve. Gustavo has a lot of ideas, and I m not sure how realistic they are. I ll still prefer him to nothing, so he is ranked next. I don t know enough about Simon and Wouter to really vote for or against them. Aigars plans though, despite knowing him personally, are not the right for a DPL post, so sorry, that puts him below NOTA.

There's a lot going on, since we're getting closer to the International Free Software Forum 8.0 that will be held in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Sacix new website is online at: www.sacix.org.br (sorry Portuguese only yet), and we've received a impressive amount of new subscribers to the related mailing lists.

Paulo and I managed to add usbfloppy support into ltspfs that I've forward to Vagrant from pkg-ltsp in Debian, Oliver (ubuntu/edubuntu) and upstream. It was just a detail for many but a huge step for us, considering that more than 100.000 end users are using their floppies into a usbfloppy drive so we really needed that in time for Sacix next release (Sagui).

Quick notes:
* My new car has a week of life
* Developers, please vote for DPL!

I'm now warming up for Roger Waters gig. See you!

As I am not a DD yet, I don’t have vote rights. That means I cannot vote in the DPL election. The only way I can influence the decision is to influence other people and try to make them vote the right way (or alternatively, just vote what I would have done) Is there a vote sponsorship page anywhere? <big smiley> If anyone got a spare vote, you are most welcome to send in my ballot:
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[2] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[7] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[2] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[1] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[5] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[6] Choice 6: Raphael Hertzog
[8] Choice 7: Anthony Towns
[4] Choice 8: Simon Richter
[3] Choice 9: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
And yes, jcristau, Myon, Q_ and others - I need to get back to my application.

I hopped onto IRC and put most of the debate questions to Gustavo Franco (stratus). You can read it next to the others - SynrG and pusling tried to help recreate the cage fight, but I think we're just too tame. There's also this linux.com article where Steve McIntyre and Anthony Towns don't answer questions and it seems the reporters didn't notice Sven Luther's withdrawal.

My apologies for not showing up for the debate, due to a car accident (not involving me) it was too late to actually being able to connect on IRC.

I just read the debate log and will be able to answer tomorrow (monday) the same questions and more for anyone interested. I'll be at OFTC as stratus (#debian-desktop) during 14:00UTC until 21:00UTC. See you there!

Well, after reading the rebuttals of my platform for DPL, i noticed that from the others candidates only one really disagree with a proposal I've included - 'backports' related. I'm really happy that they agree with some of the proposals. Unfortunately, it seems that it's common sense between the others candidates that I won't be able to do everything that's in my platform during a one year term. They're right, i won't. I won't do everything that is in my platform simple because Debian isn't a single person project. :-)

My platform is a request to in a way lead some changes and if you disagree with any idea, feel free to email me and do your suggestions. Keep in mind that I can't please every single person using or contributing to the Debian project. I'm sure that i can motivate enough people in the project to help me work on that proposals and I'll be directly involved in a lot of stuff that is there, but I've no problem share power, influence or whatever you call for the better of our operating system.

I've been working on a public Google Calendar with my schedule (if elected), maybe it will help some of the others candidate and Debian Developers understand how and when:

XML:
http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/qkkr1fd8b2qu4ms0cr9dkq56i0%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic

ICAL:
http://www.google.com/calendar/ical/qkkr1fd8b2qu4ms0cr9dkq56i0%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

HTML:
http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=qkkr1fd8b2qu4ms0cr9dkq56i0%40group.calendar.google.com

There's also my Live Platform online. The Live Platform is basically my platform as in vote.do containing some HTML fixes and additional comments (in bold) based on questions or general feedback about my platform content.

See you during the debate!

"Second Life runs on 2,000 Intel and AMD servers in two co-location facilities in San Francisco and Dallas. The company has a commitment to open source, with servers running Debian Linux and the MySQL database. Linden Lab chose Debian Linux because the software is suited to scaling massively with a small IT staff, said Linden Lab CTO Cory Ondrejka. MySQL allows the server farms to scale horizontally, by adding large numbers of low-power servers as needed, rather than vertically, which would have required Second Life to run on a few, powerful systems, Miller said."
Joe Miller is VP of platform and technology development for Linden Lab.
Source: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197800179

We know that, but sometimes we spend more time and effort with pointless discussions. Discussions are good, don't get me wrong, but they need to start and end. Get a life, go squash some bugs, package something NEW and upload to experimental, write documentation or tell the word who else is using Debian. Debian is bigger than our own egos and debates.

Don't you care that Second Life uses Debian? Aren't you a Second Life user? I'm not a Second Life user, but if Joe Miller come out and tell the word that they use something else, a lot will go and say 'look, Debian is better than that, but the world don't care let us keep fighting'. Debian aims to be a universal operating system, and the universe is bigger than OFTC and lists.debian.org.

I was thinking about mentors.debian.net and how much it's useful and unknown for many DDs and potential contributors. I don't think our GForge installation (http://alioth.debian.org) reached its full potential (in terms of audience) but is more known than mentors.

I like the mentors documentation on how a non-DD can upload packages to their repository, and almost everything else there except for the need to create yet another account in a website. I would be glad to see the code move to nm.d.o/mentors, but being less hungry why not some integration with Alioth?

I think that if we add OpenID support into GForge and push that to Alioth, services like mentors will benefit instantly any Debian contributor (DD or not) using svn.d.o, for example. I have no knowledge on GForge internals, but feedback from a GForge hacker if this feature is planned or if this contribution would be welcome will be appreciated. That would be great hear the opinions from alioth and mentors admins.

In other words: I want my Alioth OpenID and i'm sure you can think about new interesting use cases (eg.: forums, debian-community anyone?).

• Wouter Verhelst: No idea of what he’d do once elected. Asking for carte blanche?
• Aigars Mahinovs: Half of his platform has nothing to do with Debian. The other half is on crack.
• Gustavo Franco: Some good ideas, but looks like he had trouble thinking his platform through.
• Sven Luther: Should have published his platform on time.
• Sam Hocevar: Lots of good ideas, competent, brilliant and funny. Couple of ideas I am not entirely comfortable with, but I can probably live with that.
• Steve McIntyre: Current 2IC. Nothing new. Unimpressed.
• Rapha l Hertzog: I fear he could rm -rf the Project. Definitely needs a DPL hand-holding team. Doesn’t like ponies.
• Anthony Towns: No ambition for Debian. Lots of ambition for himself and money. Go away.
• Simon Richter: Empty platform. One more candidate, triggers interesting issues in devotee.
• NOTA: Great platform! Would make a perfect DPL.

These are some random thoughts based on a not very thorough reading of candidate platforms of the DPL Election 2007, and my subjective view of the candidates based on the mailing traffic I remember reading. Wouter Verhelst: Has quite a broad Debian-background, the platform also seems to share quite a bit of my view of where Debian's problems are at the moment. Doesn't propose a course of action right now, not sure how to judge that. Not sure if I remember Wouter being heavily involved in flamewars, but I do remember reading quite a few of his emails in discussions with interest. broad Debian-background, the platform also seems to share quite a bit of my view of where Debian's problems are at the moment. Doesn't propose a course of action right now, not sure how to judge that. Not sure if I remember Wouter being heavily involved in flamewars, but I do remember reading quite a few of his emails in discussions with interest. broad Debian-background, the platform also seems to share quite a bit of my view of where Debian's problems are at the moment. Doesn't propose a course of action right now, not sure how to judge that. Not sure if I remember Wouter being heavily involved in flamewars, but I do remember reading quite a few of his emails in discussions with interest. broad Debian-background, the platform also seems to share quite a bit of my view of where Debian's problems are at the moment. Doesn't propose a course of action right now, not sure how to judge that. Not sure if I remember Wouter being heavily involved in flamewars, but I do remember reading quite a few of his emails in discussions with interest. Aigars Mahinovs: Quoting from his platform: “My goal of running for DPL is not to be DPL, but to get a few concepts closer to real life.” So don't run for DPL, but start doing these things you're thinking about. Not being DPL has the advantage that you don't have to spend time on DPL stuff that would detract you from these goals. Speaking about your goals: (i) No release: I've thought about that, too, but I feel this would quickly make Debian irrelevant. (ii) $HOME configuration files organisation: take it up with the upstream developers of all the application. I think this is a very good idea, but freedesktop.org would be a better platform. (iii) Old Maintainer Process: Idea looking for a problem. (iv) Dropping Trademarks: not sure what to think about this. Gustavo Franco: Some focus on the desktop, and a constructive attitude towards Ubuntu, both positive in my book. (The first one primarily because on servers Linux is already quite well established, while the desktop is where more work is still to be done. Not because servers are less important.) His goals: (i) Core teams: as with Wouter, he sees that people and what goes on between them are where the problems are. (ii) Release goals: I think building the release based on release goals could be a driving force, but this is more RM area than DPL. (iii) Adding features to the bts doesn't need DPL powers. (iii) New developers: certainly an area that still needs attention, but the intended course is not entirely clear to me. (iv) NEW queue: same. (v) CTTE: Not sure what the idea behind this is. (vi) Groups: yes, but again not entirely clear what and how. (vii) Backports: yes, new versions of some software should go into Debian (stable) faster. Officially supporting backports or something else, I don't know, but this is an area where a DPL could pull together the RMs, security team(s), backports.org people etc. (viii) Universal OS: is this about more media coverage or about more face to face meetings? Both are good, but we should set clear goals beforehand. (ix) Much work is needed, especially in the area of buildd management (meaning: the processes and people behind it!). Does Gustavo have previous involvement here? (x) Vendors, Website, Publicity: This is more or less all about media coverage and popularity. Much needed, but as Debian as it is will never be able to commit to a public official opinion of anything, we'll need to think hard about what to do here. (xi) NMU: I don't see a great need for action here, personally. Overall: this platform contains too much material, I fear trying to tackle all these areas will lead to a burned out DPL within three months and little actually getting anywhere. Sven Luther: It's true that it always needs at least two people for a flamewar. But having a DPL who is always ready to provide one side of an argument is not a good idea. Sam Hocevar: Everything is high-level on his platform. Both good and bad. Not sure how to rate this platform, but I see myself nodding along. Learn from other OSs is good, but I hope he also means active cooperation and not just passive let's see how they do it. Steve McIntyre: Should have won 2006. Certainly did a lot of both behind-the-scenes work and some good communication. The platform lacks mention of relations between Debian and the outside world, which is an area where I feel some work is missing (and where the DPL as the only person with a official role also known outside Debian can make a difference), and also lacks mention of legal problems (trademarks and patents) where I'm not sure how solid Debian's work is. Additional argument in favor of Steve: Having a 2IC and promoting him to DPL the year after might be a good idea overall. Maybe we should actually elect the 2IC and only have a confirmation vote to promote him to DPL? Raphaël Hertzog: I like the DPL board idea. I also like how Raphaël focuses, in his platform, on the DPL board idea and some selected problems. On the other hand, the platform is wholly focused inward, outside relations are important, too ! Anthony Towns: Not sure what to think of the current DPL. I think he had good ideas, and I still think the original “spend Debian funds for the release”-idea was not that bad, but seeing how it all worked out was very, very painful for too many people. The platform seems pretty much empty, so I guess ajt won't have my vote this time. Simon Richter: Maybe I miss something, but I only see “don't repeat the dunc-tank flamefest” in his platform, which seems a bit thin. His observation that the real power of the DPL is to get everybody's attention may be partly true, though, even if this power will be spent as soon as a DPL, trying to mediate, lets himself be drawn into the flamewar instead (I don't accuse Simon that he ultimately will do this, but I fear that it happens all too quickly). Now what? I really don't have the time to thoroughly follow the campaigning, but I'll certainly have a look at the rebuttals, and perhaps somebody will do some summary. So the ballot below will certainly change. (You might also be able to buy the vote if you're rich enough ;-)

 [ 1 ] Wouter Verhelst
 [ 5 ] Aigars Mahinovs
 [ 3 ] Gustavo Franco
 [ 6 ] Sven Luther
 [ 3 ] Sam Hocevar
 [ 1 ] Steve McIntyre
 [ 2 ] Raphaë Hertzog
 [ 5 ] Anthony Towns
 [ 4 ] Simon Richter
 [ 5 ] NOTA

For those who don’t follow -vote regularly, it seems like we have currently four official nominations for this year’s DPL vote:

• Gustavo Franco
• Sven Luther
• Wouter Verhelst
• Aigars Mahinovs

and two pending ones:

• Rapha l Hertzog (undecided)
• Sam Hocevar (unofficial)

A totally unrelated note: If you want to get really frustrated and angry but don’t feel like participating in Debian’s infamous flamefests — try to learn to juggle a 5 ball cascade. This will keep you busy for several months without getting on everybody’s (well, everybody but your neighbor’s) nerves. Update: Ooops, I forgot Wouter — thanks Alexander.