Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Tue, Dec 16 2008, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
> Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> If there were something in the constitution detailing decision-making
>> process around foundation documents and their interpretation, it would
>> have made this whole conflict easier to resolve. But so far as I can
>> tell, there isn't, apart from application to voting specifically.
> There isn't anything in the constitution about the application of
> foundation documents to voting either, other than the rule about
> superseding them.
> If the proposer of vote/2003/vote_0003 had intended it to give the
> Secretary power to impose supermajority requirements on the grounds
> that an option conflicts with a foundation document, one would have
> expected him to have said so explicitly.
So, in your opinion, which decision making entity is empowered
by the constitution to make decisions about super majority
requirements? What are the constraints on their ability to decide on
this? What should they be looking at, apart from the constitution, to
decide whether a super majority rule should apply?
The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C