Re: Questions for Sruthi

Sruthi Chandran <[email protected]> Fri, 3 Apr 2026 21:56:30 +0200
Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
On 25/03/26 05:31, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Sruthi Chandran dijo [Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 06:36:04PM +0100]:
>> As far as I am aware, the two main things Debian as project does for 
>> diversity are Outreachy internships and special Diversity budget for 
>> DebConfs. I am not sure both of this are working. To know if these 
>> are working, there should be a study of retention ratio of 
>> contributors benefiting from these initiatives. This is one of the 
>> things I want to start with. We might have to completely restructure 
>> our efforts based on the output.
>
> Please count me in for this! I would be quite interested in sitting
> together with you (even with the diameter of our planet between us) 
> and try
> to crunch data on how many people have come via Outreachy internships and
> Diversity budgets and stayed to become a regular contributor, how many
> might have not joined Debian but perhaps some related free software
> project, and how many might have dropped from our sight. I think this can
> be point to important data to judge whether our efforts are worth it, and
> how to best tune them for improvement.
Thanks Gunnar, I will contact you first when taking up this task.
>
>> By becoming a DPL, one thing I can certainly do is become an example 
>> for others.
>
> Yes, and I must say, it's one of the things that I am most happy about of
> having you as our next DPL.
Thanks :)
>
>>> Question 2:
>>>
>>> If you could snap your fingers and bypass a GR and instantly change 
>>> anything in our constitution, what would that be?
>>
>> The thing I most love about Debian is its Democratic structure and 
>> collective decision making (even with its numerous shortcomings). The 
>> fact that DPL's decision itself can be overridden by GR is something 
>> that makes Debian different from other distros. So, I do not want to 
>> do any change to the constitution by bypassing GR, but I might want 
>> to propose a GR instead.
>>
>> "Defining a simpler decision making process than GR for simpler 
>> problems". My idea is that we can have GR as usual, but also 
>> something simpler to make decisions on day to day activities when we 
>> do not reach consensus through mailing list discussions.
>
> I have often said that we should not fear GRs — we should try to make 
> them
> manageable. Having a GR on any given topic should not be seen as 
> stressful
> as it is seen, and should not prompt dozens of news sites to look 
> greedily
> at Debian knowing a large flamefest is coming. In my opinion, a GR should
> be usable even to gauge the project's opinion on any given topic, without
> making it necessary for it to be a huge discussion.
>
> Of course, neither our culture nor our processes nor our tools help 
> us. GRs
> are heavy, they have long defined discussion and voting periods (even if
> they are more manageable since 
> https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_003 )
>
Yes, using GRs on daily basis would be like using sledgehammer to kill a 
fly.

> Do you have any improvements to this process that could help making
> mini-GRs more manageable?

I like the name mini-GRs :)

I just have some ideas, nothing concrete. Mini-GRs can be within a team 
or if it concerns the whole project, among all the DDs. Instead of long 
weeks of GR discussions, we can focus on reaching decision within a week 
or two of discussion. We can also reduce the requirement for sponsorship 
for the proposals. If our current voting system is heavy, we can even 
think of something lighter.

>
> Thanks for your answers!
>
>
>  — Gunnar.
OpenPGP_signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 665 B)