[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Constitutional, Parliamentary Issues (was Re: CFV: on-freearchive removal)



IANADD!

On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 11:34:19AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

>     Together, the Developers may:
>      1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader.
>      2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority.
>      3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
>      4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they
>         agree with a 2:1 majority.
> -    5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.
> -       These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
> -       relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
> -       policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
> -       software must meet.
> -       They may also include position statements about issues of the day.
> +    5. Issue and modify nontechnical policy documents and statements.
> +       These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
> +       relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
> +       policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
> +       software must meet.
> +       They may also include position statements about issues of the day.
> +   5.1 A special clause applies to the documents labelled as
> +       "Foundation Documents". These documents are those 
> +       that are deemed to be critical to the core of the project,
> +       they tend to define what the project is, and lay the
> +       foundations of its structure. The developers may
> +       modify a foundation document provided they agree with a 3:1
> +       majority. 
> +   5.2 Initially, the list of foundation Documents consists
> +       of this document, The Debian Constitution, as well as the
> +       documents known as the Debian GNU/Linux Social Contract and the 
> +       Debian Free Software Guidelines. The list of the documents
> +       that are deemed to be "Foundation Documents" may be changed
> +       by the developers provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 
>      6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
>         property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
>         s.9.1.)

IMVeryHumbleO this is needlessly wordy, redundant, not aesthetically
pleasing, and in the wrong part of the constitution.  No offense. :)
If you want the SC and the DFSG to have the same status as the
constitution, then just do this...

    Together, the Developers may:
     1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader.
-    2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority.
+    2. Amend this constitution, the Debian GNU/Linux Social Contract,
+       and/or the Debian Free Software Guidelines, provided they agree with
+       a 3:1 majority.
     3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
     4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they
        agree with a 2:1 majority.
     5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.
        These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
-       relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
-       policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
-       software must meet.
+       relationship with other free software entities, and other
+       nontechnical policies.
        They may also include position statements about issues of the day.

At first I thought "and/or" was awkward, but the constitution uses it
six times, so it's not a problem. :)

There's also the totally separate issue of the SC referring to
GNU/Linux, when Debian is now venturing into Hurd territory...

		brian



Reply to: