• Question to all candidates: how is Debian doing?

    From Lucas Nussbaum@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 17 17:00:01 2022
    Hi,

    As someone who used to care a lot about Debian, but who hasn't been able
    to pay much attention to the project lately, I was wondering:

    How is Debian doing currently?

    What are the recent successes I might have missed?

    Where did we fail or under-perform?

    Which big challenges do you see ahead of us?

    Are there opportunities that we could leverage?

    - Lucas

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Felix Lechner@21:1/5 to lucas@debian.org on Thu Mar 17 18:00:02 2022
    Hi Lucas,

    On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 8:55 AM Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> wrote:

    How is Debian doing currently?

    We do what we have always done, but the world is changing around us.

    What are the recent successes I might have missed?

    We are quirky, but very much alive!

    Where did we fail or under-perform?

    We are falling behind other distributions and programming environments
    that embrace change and have corporate funding.

    Which big challenges do you see ahead of us?

    Users may stop caring about Debian and pick one of many alternatives.

    Are there opportunities that we could leverage?

    We need to motivate our contributors, who are our greatest assets, and
    attract many new ones to do great things together!

    If elected, I hope to form a Strategy Council that will re-evaluate as
    well as expand on those answers, and have solutions ready at all
    times.

    Thank you for asking such precious questions!

    Kind regards,
    Felix Lechner

    P.S. Everyone, please join #meetfelix on OFTC. I hope to get to know you better!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lucas Nussbaum@21:1/5 to Felix Lechner on Thu Mar 17 21:00:01 2022
    Thanks for you answers

    On 17/03/22 at 09:50 -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
    If elected, I hope to form a Strategy Council that will re-evaluate as
    well as expand on those answers, and have solutions ready at all
    times.

    Interesting. What would be the composition, roles, duties of that
    Strategy Council ?

    Lucas

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Felix Lechner@21:1/5 to lucas@debian.org on Thu Mar 17 22:10:01 2022
    Hi Lucas,

    On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:52 PM Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> wrote:

    Interesting. What would be the composition, roles, duties of that
    Strategy Council ?

    Like all committees and boards I envision, the Strategy Council should
    have at least five but no more than twelve members. I personally like
    nine, if you can get that many volunteers.

    The council should set out to devise and keep updated solutions to all
    problems that (1) require more than three years of planning; (2) will
    not arise for another three years but some time thereafter; or (3) are otherwise critical for Debian's survival as a project.

    The council is encouraged to modify that list.

    Given your past service as project leader, I would be honored to
    appoint you as the first member (pending confirmation by the
    Appointments Committee).

    At the initial meeting, the council would elect a Chair and a Vice
    Chair, and also decide on its procedures. For example, you could form
    a subcommittee to develop bylaws, which could be as simple as:

    1. The council has five seats, each to be held by an appointed member.
    2. No action shall be taken nor any discussion take place unless at
    least half the seats are filled.
    3. We will meet monthly.

    My only other requirement is that you try to follow California's open
    meeting laws [1] which, for starters, mean: (a) the meetings are open
    to the public; (b) you post an itemized agenda at least 72 hours
    before each meeting; and (c) you allow limited public comment (such as
    three minutes each for fewer than ten speakers, two minutes each for
    fewer than twenty speakers, and one minute each for thirty or more
    speakers).

    Finally and most important (d) members are prohibited from discussing
    council business with each other outside of meetings. That requirement
    exists so that interested people from the public may follow your
    deliberations.

    In lieu of written minutes, it may be best to record the meetings.

    It would also be nice if you could publish an annual top ten list of
    issues (potentially a single page) for the benefit of other project
    members.

    Thank you for your interest in the Strategy Council!

    Kind regards
    Felix Lechner

    P.S. Everyone, please join #meetfelix on OFTC. I hope to get to know you better!

    [1] https://www.calcities.org/detail-pages/resource/open-public-v-a-guide-to-the-ralph-m.-brown-act

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hideki Yamane@21:1/5 to Lucas Nussbaum on Sun Mar 20 12:20:01 2022
    Hi,

    On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 16:54:54 +0100
    Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> wrote:
    How is Debian doing currently?

    Working steadily as well as before, and providing better quality in
    testing/unstable than ever (stable is also better of course).

    As usual, more packages in each releases.


    What are the recent successes I might have missed?

    Well, there are more derivatives that are based on Debian than before.
    The trend of server systems goes to a container, and many many people
    (and systems) use debian(-slim) docker image and distroless that uses Debian.

    It means, we've provided a lot of values for the world - transparently.


    Where did we fail or under-perform?

    We have many derivatives that may mean they are not satisfied with our
    project and want to make it outside of the project. And upstreaming it
    to Debian is not so much. Some of them are worth it for users, and they
    can make Debian more attractive. Please take them to us, borrow them!


    Wrong reputation: 'Debian means "too old to use"' :(

    It is not valid, and as a user of testing/unstable, I can see that
    we are making updates every day. But I can see such words in social media
    a lot - it's a failure. It seems that "Many items are produced in a factory,
    but consumers cannot see it at the stores." It's not a manufacturing system
    failure, but we can put more performance in a delivery system, IMO.


    Which big challenges do you see ahead of us?

    * Refactoring the project and its infrastructure (more effort and investment)
    * With above, provide more "values" through daily development with
    stability (as ever) and predictable changes for users
    * Communicate with users and contributors more, hear their voice
    * More statistics to measure success (and fail) and decide direction


    All of the above needs contributors' will! :)


    Are there opportunities that we could leverage?

    Huge YES. We can do more - if we would "Embrace Change".


    --
    Hideki Yamane <henrich@iijmio-mail.jp>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jonathan Carter@21:1/5 to Lucas Nussbaum on Fri Mar 25 23:20:02 2022
    Hi Lucas

    On 2022/03/17 17:54, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
    As someone who used to care a lot about Debian, but who hasn't been able
    to pay much attention to the project lately, I was wondering:

    I don't think anyone would hold it against you that you've got busy with
    other stuff, having a life outside Debian is also considered very
    healthy these days.

    How is Debian doing currently?

    Excellent question! A few weeks ago I saw a headline "Is Mozilla ok?",
    and while I've thought about it on different levels for a while, it was
    the first time that I thought in the exact words "Is Debian OK!?" and
    mean to write something about it (possibly in a blog post, possibly in a
    "bits from the DPL" mail), but as with this mail, it ended up in various
    forms of drafts and I never made it half way with it, at least not yet.

    So starting with a tl;dr, I think Debian is doing ok. It's not doing
    great, but it is ok.

    When we ask how Debian is doing, it's also useful to qualify what we're
    asking. Is the Debian project (our structure, project members, larger community...) ok? Is the Debian distribution (what features our users
    need, severity of bugs, are we living up to our promises, etc...) ok?

    On the positive side, we are chugging along quite well. Packages (and
    lots of new packages) get uploaded, old crud eventually gets deleted
    (last release was pretty good in this front), bugs get fixed, since 2005
    the project has managed to release every 2 years, the website team has
    great plans to make the website more friendly (*poke to www team to make
    some public update please*), we finally have a functioning community
    team (after some iterations and speedbumps), we now have the fasttrack
    project (although still quite young) to deal with things that move to
    fast for our usual archives, we're slowly but surely improving community processes that people have complained about for a while (like our
    current and previous GR to improve voting).

    Our finances are also really good, our donors show lots of confidence in
    us. Our corporate sponsors are already great, but I'm constantly amazed
    by the generosity of our individual donors! There are people who donate
    a $1000 at a time, some a few $100 every month, and sometimes even a
    sporadic $4 donation from the same person. It's all very valuable and appreciated! One person even donated $100,000 worth of shares to Debian
    (was worth $140,000 when I checked last week) which was extremely
    generous. Even though we've been spending a lot, our available funds are
    also the highest they've ever been, last year we surpassed the $1m mark
    in available funds for the first time.

    That's great. As DPL, that allowed me to feel comfortable saying yes to
    every single request every DD has made (which I did, and even some none-DDs.

    I'll focus on the challenging aspects further down since that is a
    seperate question.

    What are the recent successes I might have missed?

    I'll list just a few things since you got busy, there's probably a lot more.

    We're getting a bit better at working with industry. We have a person
    from Lenovo helping out with hardware support on their latest hardware,
    we just today had a DD join from Microsoft, and Microsoft also covered
    our LWN subscriptions for the last year (thanks!). There's lots of ways
    big Linux users out there are helping us out, Hetzner gave us a huge
    discount on our backup server hosting, Lenovo gave us a significant
    discount on some servers we bought for DSA hosted stuff, and the list
    goes on.

    Our local groups initiative is also taking form again. I can't wait to
    see more from this, covid put a real dampener on this, but between the
    Debian reunion even in Germany and DebConf22, I hope there will be some
    great local team packs made that can be sent around the world well
    before the end of the year.

    We've moved from Alioth to Salsa (GitLab instance) in 2017. This created
    a big leap forward in how easy it is to make contributions to Debian.
    Since then, Gnome, KDE, and many other free software projects have also implemented a GitLab instance, it's now a very familiar and common way
    to do things in the free software world, and I think this was a
    significant and important change for us, even though it came with its
    own set of speedbumps and challenges too.

    We've gained a riscv64 port. Along with the lowrisc project to make a
    fully open source CPU, it opens up the possibility to have a truly and
    fully free hardware and software stack using Debian. It seems like it
    may still be some years before you could easily buy a phone/e-reader/router/laptop/desktop/server/etc with a riscv64 cpu that
    can run Debian, but the foundations are being laid, and I consider that critically important. Hardware is increasingly being locked down, and we
    don't know how long it will be before you have to contact your
    manufacturer in order to get an unlock code in order to install an
    alternative operating system on a typical laptop (as it is with many
    phones right now). This is an area in which I hope we'll grow in more
    and can really shine in the future.

    There's a lot happening in the machine learning world too, too much to
    mention here. But I'm glad that some DDs have already taken the time to
    think about how this affects Debian, and there's an early draft that
    exists of a Debian Machine Learning Policy, which can be read at https://salsa.debian.org/deeplearning-team/ml-policy/-/blob/master/ML-Policy.rst

    Debian gained secureboot support, this took a bunch of big pushes but
    besides the benefits of secureboot itself, it makes dual-booting or new installations a lot easier for non-expert users, who previously we had
    to explain how to get into their firmware setup to disable it (lots of
    varied systems out there made this difficult in some times since many
    novices struggled even getting into their firmware), so
    for multiple reasons, this was also an important milestone.

    There's reproducible builds, an effort to ensure that a binary built
    from source is 100% reproducible, which means that builds can be
    verified and trusted not to have been poisoned at some point during compilation. The core members of reproducible builds are all Debian
    Developers, but the project now extends across many Linux distributions
    and other software projects. It's a huge Debian success story, even
    though we're not 100% reproducible ourselves yet. The release team now
    also require binary packages in stable releases to be built on Debian infrastructure from source, so no more binaries in stable releases that
    were built on people's laptops (or in some weird cases, even built in
    Ubuntu).

    There's https://fabre.debian.net/ - an initiative to make a friendly
    interface for browsing the BTS.

    We now host a debuginfod service, which allows you to debug software
    without having to download their debuginfo packages by retreiving it
    online (more info on https://wiki.debian.org/Debuginfod). Our instance
    is one of the largest debuginfod services out there.

    The above two services are two of a whole bunch of services ran by
    project volunteers. During my first term of being DPL, I received lots
    of requests for the project to pay for services that DDs host at various providers that run under the debian.net domain. Some of these really
    expensive, so I worked with debian.ch to get us some accounts at
    providers so that we can create instances for our DDs and host and pay
    for them ourselves, streamlining a lot of admin and at least if a DD
    dissapears for a while and we need to make some serious security fix, we
    can also gain access to the VM. Not very original, but we formed a team
    called the debian.net team to assist with services run on debian.net
    (some details: https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianNet). As an aside,
    looking at that page I was just reminded that rsync.net provides 500GB
    of backup space for every DD, which is plenty of space to backup typical
    things hosted under debian.net domains.

    Before that, I was also struggling to figure out how and where to host a PeerTube instance. PeerTube is a federated video sharing platform that
    uses webtorrent to scale out so that many users can watch a video at the
    same time without needing a lot of server infrastructure. I wanted to
    install this so that DebConf videos are more discoverable and so that
    local teams can easier share locally produced content without having to
    upload it to YouTube. PeerTube fedirates on a network called "the
    fediverse", and it turns out there was a bunch of other federated
    services that debianites also wanted to implement. So we founded the debian.social project (https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianSocial) that
    hosts services like our PeerTube instance
    (https://peertube.debian.social/) and a few others that are too much
    detail for this email at this point. It's also the project under which
    we installed our Jitsi server (https://jitsi.debian.social/), jitsi is a
    free software platform for making group video calls, it's been used
    quite widely in the project since the start of the pandemic.

    Covid came with a whole slew of challenges for the project, not being
    able to meet in person has been really tough. 2020 was set to be our
    biggest year in terms of MiniConfs. But we don't give up easily, and
    gave a shot at our first ever mini DebConf that was entirely online.
    Besides a few hickups, it was a big success, and we learned a lot to
    make future online events a lot better. DebConf20 then ended up being
    our first ever completely online DebConf. We also ended up donating all
    the proceeds from DC20 for a PeerTube streaming feature, that will make
    it easier for future Debian (and others) to stream small events in the
    future (https://bits.debian.org/2020/10/debian-donation-peertube.html).

    Maybe a bit subjective, but I think our look and feel has improved quite
    a bit over the last few releases. Debian just "feels" a lot more
    polished. We have a lot less papercuts on our desktops on the live
    media, our default artwork has been pretty good for a few releases now.
    Our live media has also gained the Calamares installer. While I don't
    consider this a big piece of progress, it at least makes our
    installation media a lot more useful until we as a project have a better long-term strategy for our installer.

    There are also entire teams full of achievements that I didn't get to
    here (Debian Med team has been great and very relevant during covid!).

    There's also so many smaller things that happened that I can't get into,
    for example, APT finally hit v1.0, you can now setup dkim for your
    @debian.org email address, we now have a much more loopy sponsors loop
    for DebConf (https://peertube.debian.social/w/aEjdorA9M71tvm558YxyAP), etc.

    For people who are very busy, I'd also suggest subscribing to https://bits.debian.org - this is where our publicity team posts as
    often as they can. But they also don't get to everything, if someone
    reading this has something that you think the project (and the world)
    should know about, get in touch with them on #debian-publicity, or even
    better yet, write something for them (anyone who has access to salsa can
    help write a story for bit.debian.org).

    Overall, Debian has been very busy the last 5 years, and there's been
    many changes, which always surprise me when there are the few people who
    claims that nothing ever happens in Debian.

    Where did we fail or under-perform?

    (I'm going to try to cover these at the same time because there might be
    some large overlap, and also in the interest of time I spend on this
    mail :) )

    In a previous DPL talk from me, I explained that Debian is a bottomless
    pit of problems. This might sound harsh, or mean, but if you look at our
    scope of work, we're affected by just about every problem that exists in computer science and the general computing world. I suppose at least
    we're not too concerned about quantum computing problems... yet.

    Besides our countless technical challenges, we're also affected by many
    social problems in the world. The less privileged someone is, the more
    likely it is that they are earning less for doing the same kind of work.
    It's difficult to convince someone to work for free on challenging
    technical work when they are also struggling to pay their own bills.
    There is some positive edge to this though, there are also many people
    who have been able to make a career they wouldn't have been able to
    otherwise, because of free software (I count myself into this category).

    While I think we under-perform in the area of diversity, I do think we
    can (and will) improve. I think that putting more effort into local
    teams will help a lot. Helping more people learn about Debian, how to
    use Debian and all the wonderful things you can do with it will spark
    more and more interest, and as people in different areas become more
    successful in their careers using Debian, it will inspire more people
    from their local area to join in. On that note, it would be great if we
    could also help people more on their Debian careers somehow.

    Taking an educated guess before, I've estimated that we need 2-3 times
    the volunteers we have now to pull off the goals of the Debian project
    on the level that we want to. As someone pointed out to me recently,
    this isn't unique to Debian or free software, this is often the case in commercial software too. I was glad that some of my instincts were also mirrored in a more scientific study of Debian, Kaylea Champion presented
    some very interesting data at DebConf21 in her talk "Detecting At-Risk
    Projects in Debian"
    (https://peertube.debian.social/w/49JyBRR33c4d4oS1SvzK2U). While I would
    take some conclusions with a grain of salt, it certainly provides some
    food for thought in terms of matching up where we spend our energy the
    most optimally.

    A lot of our processes fall short. And I'm tempted to write out a long
    list of examples of that, but again in the interest of getting this mail
    sent out at a reasonable time, I'll do that some other time. A few
    recent events specifically bother me. The usrmerge situation is very unfortunate, it doesn't seem like there's a clear right way out of it
    yet (I admit I'm about 20 bugmails behind on that right now, so
    hopefully I'm wrong and something has changed). Our on boarding
    processes are difficult to navigate, I'd love to help on that at some
    point, but I know that wouldn't be possible for a DPL during a DPL term, there's just too many little things to take care of, I hope to spend
    some time on that after I'm DPL. Exiting has gotten a little better, if
    someone wants to retire from Debian it's now just a few clicks to enter emeritus status. The processes for firing someone from the project are a
    lot more problematic. There's some barely started conversations on this recently when it comes to DAM and CT reform, hopefully after our current
    vote, we'll have some more bandwidth to take it on.

    I very, very much enjoy using the software that we're upstream for
    (dpkg, apt, d-i, dh, etc), but I feel we're not doing enough to support
    these. I hope that when the world situations improve that we can have
    more sprints for these, encourage developers for these to speak more at
    events and ensure that each bit of upstream software we're responsible
    for has a team behind it and not a single person carrying most of the load.

    When it comes to money, I think we should really consider a kind of
    grants system, where we collectively decide on a piece of work that
    someone can do in exchange for a set amount of money. This could help us
    solve some more long-standing issues that we don't get time for, and
    help someone out. At the same time, I don't think that would compromise
    us as a volunteer project, the project direction would still be
    determined by the collective of volunteers (as apposed to some external organization or entity).

    Which big challenges do you see ahead of us?

    There's just so much change, and I don't think we can even anticipate
    all the changes that are going to come. Having the right pieces in place
    to deal with change is going to become more and more important.

    A small part of me is also concerned that consumer computing products
    are going to continue being more locked down (hopefully future open
    hardware can help counter that, and I think we should be a part of that).

    One part that has changed significantly over the last more than a decade
    is firmware. It used to be something that was shipped with your hardware
    that you could update in many cases if it fixed a bug. Now, it is
    something that's increasingly loaded using software from disk, this
    creates some significant problems for us. For example, on our default
    live media many wireless network cards doesn't work. This /used/ to be
    much less of a problem when we could tell people "Oh just install and
    then install the iwlwifi from non-free afterwards", but more and more
    consumer hardware doesn't have a wired ethernet port anymore. In the
    past, if we didn't have the right display driver, we could launch
    graphics in a degraded performance mode (like a vesa driver). On many
    chips this isn't even possible anymore. So where we could do an install
    first and then install just a non-free piece of firmware for graphics afterwards, live media would now just give a black screen for those
    cards. The ac97 audio architecture that's been in use for a long time
    seems to be making way for the new intel audio, which also need non-free firmware to be loaded in order to work. This has just been getting
    increasingly worse, and not at all better. Ideally, I would have really
    much appreciated if the FSF and OSI could lobby hardware manufacturers
    to change this. Some people think that such an excercise would be
    futile, but at least it would be doing /something/ in the positive
    direction, and I'm fairly positive that some companies could be
    convinced to be more free-software-friendly, sometimes even just moving
    that dial can be beneficial long-term. Until we find actual solutions,
    we might also have to consider making our images with non-free firmware
    on easier to find for our users, along with very clear information that
    media containing those files do not conform to our usual promises like
    our social contract.

    So in a nutshell, I think being able to install on physical hardware is
    going to remain being an important challenge, and we should co-ordinate
    and work on it from various angles.

    Are there opportunities that we could leverage?
    I think so, every problem also brings opportunity. In the case of
    firmware above, perhaps it would be useful for Debian to fund reverse engineering of firmware where it seems plausible. Perhaps that should be
    done under a consortium for that goal that could get some specific
    sponsorship from all the companies who would like to see that goal materialized.

    I could list a bunch more, but it's 23:38 here right now and I've spend
    quite a lot of time on this mail already so I'll mostly leave it at that.

    When it comes to opportunities, I think most long-time DDs have some
    good ideas on how to leverage them, but we all get busy and bogged down
    with our own areas of interest and problems. It's why in-person meetings
    are also so crucial for us as a project, because it's often where people
    get exposed to both problems and ideas outside of their personal Debian
    bubble.

    I wish I could chat some more about the topics you've asked about, but
    time for bed here, thanks for your questions!

    -Jonathan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Theodore Ts'o@21:1/5 to Felix Lechner on Tue Mar 29 22:40:04 2022
    On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 01:57:59PM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
    Hi Lucas,

    On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:52 PM Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> wrote:

    Interesting. What would be the composition, roles, duties of that
    Strategy Council ?

    Like all committees and boards I envision, the Strategy Council should
    have at least five but no more than twelve members. I personally like
    nine, if you can get that many volunteers....

    I'll note that you spent a lot of time about how the council would
    appoint a chair and vice-chair, create bylaws, meet monthly, etc.

    However you didn't really answer the question regarding what the
    authorities that the Strategy Council would have. You've said that
    the strategy council would expand on your answers that were given in
    the top of this thread --- but then what?

    If the Strategy Council were to decide that a strategy might be, say,
    "a mouse should put a bell on the cat", how would that strategy be
    carried out? Debian is a volunteer organization ---- some have said, "do-ocracy". So I'm not sure what you, as the DPL, would do with the conclusions that might be made by such a Strategy Council?

    Cheers,

    - Ted

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Felix Lechner@21:1/5 to tytso@mit.edu on Wed Mar 30 01:00:02 2022
    Hi Ted,

    On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 1:39 PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

    I'll note that you spent a lot of time about how the council would
    appoint a chair and vice-chair, create bylaws, meet monthly, etc.

    However you didn't really answer the question regarding what the
    authorities that the Strategy Council would have. You've said that
    the strategy council would expand on your answers that were given in
    the top of this thread --- but then what?

    If the Strategy Council were to decide that a strategy might be, say,
    "a mouse should put a bell on the cat", how would that strategy be
    carried out? Debian is a volunteer organization ---- some have said, "do-ocracy". So I'm not sure what you, as the DPL, would do with the conclusions that might be made by such a Strategy Council?

    In my reading of Lucas's original questions, he merely probed the
    thinking of the candidates. Lucas did not express a concern that any
    of us would fail for lack of authority. My responses were meant to
    answer his questions.

    At the same time, I will answer your questions as well.

    The idea behind the committees is to establish, by experiment, that
    two or more heads think better together than one alone. Large parts of
    the project still operate according to the "strong maintainer" model,
    so that's a significant paradigm shift. The committees provide a soft counterweight that cares about the project as a whole. A better group
    spirit alone will be a noticeable advance for Debian.

    As to your specific concern about how strategic conclusions might be
    used, a project leader can benefit from the advice in many ways. For
    example, I would make sure that my own actions work for us in the long
    term, and not against us.

    As a passionate optimist, I may also need an occasional reality check
    from our best and brightest. Since everything is public, all members
    can do the same.

    Perhaps most significantly, I hope to present the membership with a
    wide range of novel and creative proposals. The findings of a Strategy
    Council could create a sense of urgency—a rare sentiment in Debian—to embrace new ideas.

    In short, the Strategy Council will help us, as a group, to get
    unstuck in many ways. That's how we will get stuff done.

    Thank you for your challenging question!

    Kind regards,
    Felix Lechner

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)