On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:40:09PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > I'll let the patch linger for a couple of days -- actually, I'll be away
> > for most part of tomorrow -- and then I'll apply it, posting a new
> > complete draft here shortly thereafter.
> So I'm not considering this currently as an amendment.
Kurt, my inclination was to consider this change as falling under
Constitution §A.1.3 as a change that "does not alter the meaning" of the
proposal. Do you disagree with that interpretation? If so I can, as the
proposer, turn that change into a formal amendment and directly accept
it (under §A.1.1 and §A.1.2), offering then the opportunity to seconders
to disagree forking the text. I think it's in the best interest of all
of us not to fork two options for *this* specific reason and I think
§A.1.3 applies and it's the best way forward.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Caposella .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature