Re: Manifesto for the Debian Project leadership
Ian Jackson wrote:
> What I'm planning to do is make an arrangement whereby a sufficient
> number of developers can force a vote on an amendment. The votes on
> all the amendments would be done together when they'd all be
> collected, at the same time as the vote on the resolution itself, so
> you'd still just cast one ballot at the end, but it would have more
> than just `yes/no' on it.
Can you please explain better what do you mean with the word
The result would be very different depending on if you mean "a patched
proposal" or "a patch to a proposal".
On the former meaning it would be OK to have all the votes on a single
ballot, while on the latter meaning it would be better to have two
ballots: first vote for all the amendments (patches) and later vote
yes/no for the patched document.
Each of these two scenario has its good and bad.
The former is more quick and compact, but forces voters to choose one
"party"; the latter is slow and may end with unexpected results, but has
finer granularity and gives stronger value to the final vote.
I think we could live with the former, although a good "patch" to it
would be to add some sort of "ballotage" (second vote with less
| firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
> Just because Red Hat do it doesn't mean it's a good idea. [Ian J.]
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
email@example.com . Trouble?
e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .