Hi folks,
Here is a spell checked version, and also one that removes the
modify clause for the foundation documents. So now we may issue,
withdraw, and supersede these documents, but not modify them in
place.
======================================================================
4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
4.1. Powers
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, supersede and withdraw 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 Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as
+ critical to the Project's mission and purposes.
+ 5.2 The Foundation Documents are the works entitled "Debian
+ Social Contract" and "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
+ 5.3 A Foundation Document requires a 3:1 super-majority for its
+ supercession. New Foundation Documents are issued and
+ existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation
+ Documents in this constitution.
6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
s.9.1.)
======================================================================
Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite
ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two
wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the
language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical
documents. Additionally, this also provides for the core documents of
the project the same protection against hasty changes that the
constitution itself enjoys.
======================================================================
Seems to me like most people have had a chance to comment on
this proposal, and the current version ought to have addressed most
of the issues raised. If that is the case, I would like to have this
version be the one sponsored by people, and settle on this as the
version that goes on the ballot.
manoj
--
The privilege of absurdity; to which no living creature is subject but
man only. -- Thomas Hobbs
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424CAttachment:
pgp6OKy0z8i60.pgp
Description: PGP signature