Re: Initial draft proposed consitutution (v0.1)
On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Please comment on it - here on debian-devel, please, rather than by
> private email.
Just scanned it, first comments:
Section 6.2.4, Technical Committee Overruling a developer:
If no one is willing to implement the bug fix or take over maintenance
of a package, I believe the developer should still retain the last word.
Perhaps such bugs could be downgraded to Wishlist.
The Secretary appears to be a single point of failure. It looks like a
rather large job. If the secretary is temporarily unavailable, no one is
authorized to fill in, and any votes must wait on their return or a new
appointment. Perhaps an Assistant or Delegate could be authorized to take
minor votes (resolutions).
I'm a bit unsure of the intended role of Delegates. Could you
elaborate on the types of tasks you see them performing?
Section 9.2.2 appears to be missing a "no".
Is the Standard Resolution Procedure intended to replace the informal
discussions and policy changes currently held on debian-policy? It looks
like SRP would be much slower (which might be a good thing).
Dr. Drake Diedrich, Research Officer - Computing, (02)6279-8302
John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University 0200
Replies to other than Drake.Diedrich@anu.edu.au will be routed off-planet
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org