Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
>> Therefore the Debian project resolves that
>> a) The constitution gets changed to not require K developers to sponsor
>> a resolution, but floor(2Q). [see §4.2(1)]
> not sure if we need floor(2Q) here, but at least floor(Q).
It is 2Q as I do want a seperation to the one in b) (to stop a
delegate/DPL/the TC). And I dislike going below Q for any option, so b)
has the lower, Q, and a is 2Q.
Besides, its only 30 people with floor(2Q)...
> d) If a resolution will affect an upcoming release which is already frozen,
> the resolution needs twice the number of sponsors as defined in a).
While I dislike the GR we just had so short before release I don't think
making a special case for a release is good. If it is I want a special
case for DAM too, every override of a DAM decision takes 6Q at least!
Well, joking, the point is just that its an exception for one special
case which I dislike.
> This should help to avoid that some random people try to stop a release in the
> latest moment if there's not a really good reason to do so. If we want Debian
> to be used in business ("enterprise" *gasp*) installations, we should at least
> be able to tell people when we're about to release, without having them to
> fear a delay for months or years due to a GR.
Now, this proposal changes it from "some random people" counting to 5 up
to 30. I think thats enough, if you find so many supporters for your GR,
then yes, even a release might have to wait.
--
bye, Joerg
<exa> And mind you, I have always been respectful to every debian
developer EXCEPT Branden.
Reply to: