On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 07:10:30PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > At the conclusion of our standard voting period of one week, there were > > three votes of BAC and one vote of AB. (One additional vote of BAC came > > in after the voting period had ended.) > > As this is, depending on how one looks at it, a conflict between a > > maintainer and ftp-master policy or a maintainer and the current > > requirements of Debian Policy, I don't believe the 3:1 super-majority > > requirement applies here and the ballot should be decided by simple > > majority rule. > Both text clearly talk about policy, and not about overriding > ftp-master. Overriding ftp-master would be overriding a delegate > of the DPL, and I don't think you have that power to begin with. This is a surprising claim, but upon review, I see that the constitution states only that the TC may overrule Developers, not Delegates, and a strict constructionist reading of the constitution would support the idea that a Developer, when acting as a Delegate, can not be overruled by the TC. I think this is a bug in the wording of the constitution however, and not a position that is supported by historical practice. I'm fairly certain that this is not what our DPLs expected when expanding the scope of delegated roles within the project. Perhaps Ian would like to chime in here wearing his "I wrote the constitution" hat. :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature