[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5.1)

Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5)"):
> 	6.1.4 reads:
> ______________________________________________________________________
>     4. Overrule a developer (requires a 3:1 majority).
>        The Technical Committee may ask a developer to take a particular
>        technical course of action even if the developer does not wish to;
>        this requires a 3:1 majority. For example, the Committee may
>        determine that a complaint made by the submitter of a bug is
>        justified and that the submitter's proposed solution should be
>        implemented.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 	Does this mean a vote held by the technical committee? Or a
>  vote held as a general SRP? If the former, is there anyway for the
>  developrs as a body to override it? Section 4.1 does not mention this
>  as a power that the developers have as a group (The technical
>  committee is not a delegate, as I read the constituition).

That's right.  There is not at the moment a way for the developers to
override the technical committee, other than by amending the
consitution to allow it at the time.

I think that it's a very bad idea to have technical decisions made by
voting amongst a large group of people.  The point of the technical
committee is to ensure technical competence and to insulate those
technical decisions from popularity contests and votes.

If might be a good idea to explicitly allow the developers to override
the committee with a 2:1 supermajority, since they can achieve the
same effect by amending the constitution.

I've also been wondering if 2:1 is too low a supermajority for
constitutional amendments.

Does anyone else have any thoughts ?  I haven't included any changes
to this area in my most recent draft.

> 	I think 6.1.4 should be clarified, and 4.1 should be expanded
>  to cover the interaction between the technical committee and
>  the developers as a group.
> 	If I find others of a like mind, we can even submit this as a
>  formal amendment ;-)

I see you've already done this.  However, why don't we wait and see
what other people think, and discuss the matter for a bit ?


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: