Re: Counter-Proposal (was Re: Amendment to the Constitution: Add a new foundation document)
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:55:41 -0500
Chad Walstrom <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 03:57:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the list of
> > foundation documents the document attached in this proposal, titled
> > "Transition Guide"
> I'm also not comfortable with adding verbose documentation for solutions
> that can be succinctly implemented.
> The foundation documents were a good idea. Because foundation documents
> represent portions of Policy, applying specific versions of foundation
> documents with specific releases of Debian is perfectly acceptable. An
> additional foundation document isn't necessary to describe this process.
The proposal is fine in and of itself, but it's also incomplete. It
basically says "a release is judged by the Social Contract which was in
effect when it was released." Which is right and proper and should be
the case, but it doesn't say anything about Sid or a release we're about
to make. After changing the SC, should the ftpmasters go cutting a swath
through the archive removing every package in Sid or testing which don't
comply with the SC?
The wordy proposal, while wordy, covers everything - and it also
provides rationale and context for the user.
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in mud.
After a while, you realise the pig is enjoying it.
OpenPGP v4 key ID: 4096R/59DDCB9F
Fingerprint: CC53 F124 35C0 7BC2 58FE 7A3C 157D DFD9 59DD CB9F
Retreive from subkeys.pgp.net or risk key corruption