Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Fri, 19 Dec 2008, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 09:28:27AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Superseding a document is easily recognizable: it's when you explicitely
> > say that you're going to change its _content_ (ex:
> > http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_003 ). Any time that this is not the
> > case, you should assume that we're not changing our common goal but that
> > we're discussing the interpretation that we make of it
> If that is the case, why would anyone propose changing a foundation
> document, and risk failing to meet the 3:1 requirement, when they could
> simply declare that they interpret it to say what they would like it to
> say, and have a 1:1 vote?
Because they really want to change the goal/values of the project?
And please don't assume that a majority of developers are insane
and want to pervert the project. If that is the case, we're all in
a bad situation anyway. :-)
I'm convinced that a majority of developers would vote against any
proposition that contradicts the social contract if there's no
(good) rationale for the decision that justifies to temporary
shift away from our goals.
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :