> The good news is that this possibility, too, has been foreseen in the constitution. In the absence of a project leader, the chair of the technical committee a

> The good news is that this possibility, too, has been foreseen in the constitution. In the absence of a project leader, the chair of the technical committee and the project secretary are empowered to make decisions — as long as they are able to agree on what those decisions should be. Since Debian developers are famously an agreeable and non-argumentative bunch, there should be no problem with that aspect of things. Even if nobody puts their name this week or the next or the week after, and even with the sarcastic remark in the last sentence, it looks like this is not such a big deal after all. > In other words, the project will manage to muddle along for a while without a leader, though various aspects of business could slow down and become more awkward if the current candidate drought persists. Why should it muddle along or slow down? All the responsibilities listed (and linked to in a mail in the mailing list) seem to be things that others could take up, either individually or as smaller groups. It's something that could be worked out over a period of time. > One might well wonder, though, why there seems to be nobody who wants to take the helm of this project for a year. The fact that it is an unpaid position requiring a lot of time and travel might have something to do with it. The last sentence is probably the issue. Couldn't sponsorships help? The last thing we need is Debian to become corporatized. Donate to Debian at https://www.debian.org/donations https://www.debian.org/donations