Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
MJ Ray wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com>
> >> propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had
> >> been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion
> >> have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at
> >> this time.
> I suggested rewording this condition-less conditional phrase:
> >> + It would be preferable if the organizations holding assets in
> >> + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of
> >> + such assets, as an example:
> + It is preferred that the organizations holding assests in
> + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of
> + such assets, as an example:
> or more normally and concisely:
> + Organizations holding assets in trust for Debian should undertake
> + obligations for the handling of such assets, similar to this:
> Please will you accept one of those amendments?
You're right to correct the original, but I don't think you've nailed it
If there's a "should" then "obligation" is clearly the wrong word to go
with it. And you don't "undertake an obligation" -- you "meet an
obligation", or "undertake to meet" it.
Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian will be required to
meet certain obligations in their handling of such assets...
It is preferred that organisations holding assets in trust for Debian
should comply with certain conditions regarding their handling of such