Hi, I second this proposal. Bye Cesar Mendoza http://www.kitiara.org -- I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. --Voltaire On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 03:57:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > [MY new CVS Emacs seems to have munged th headers, here is a new > version, with a few typographical errors fixed] > > Hi, > > In order to handle the changes introduced in the GR 2004_003, > I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide > guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a > change occurs in a foundation document like the social contract, and > also provides specific remedies to the current dilemma that we find > ourself in. This GR proposal is related to the GR currently in > discussion for deferring of the changes made in GR 2004_003, and > would be on the same ballot, and is an alternative to the GR > currently in discussion. > > I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the > list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal, > titled "Transition Guide" > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > <OL style="list-style: decimal;"> > <LI>A Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as > critical to the Project's mission and purposes.</LI> > <LI>The Foundation Documents are the works entitled <q>Debian > - Social Contract</q> and <q>Debian Free Software Guidelines</q>.</LI> > + Social Contract</q>, <q>Transition Guide</q> and > + <q>Debian Free Software Guidelines</q>.</LI> > <LI>A Foundation Document requires a 3:1 majority for its > supersession. New Foundation Documents are issued and > existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation > Documents in this constitution.</LI> > </OL> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Content-Description: Transition Guide > Transition Guide > A working guide to achieve the transition for changes in Foundation documents > with specific remedies for the change in the social contract made by GR 2004_003 > containing explanations and Rationale, and defining > guidelines for future transitions > > In GR 2004_003, the wording of the social contract was modified. The > sociial contract represents the core of what the project is, and the > implications of the Social Contract leave their mark in many ways, > deeply intertwined with the components of the distribution. Any > change in the social contract has major ramifications, and may > require a period of work and potentially deep rooted changes before > we can come into compliance with the contract. > > Meeting out commitments to the Social Contract is an on going > process. Since we have recently changed these commitments, we need > an interval of time before we can approach compliance. Unless we > shut down the project completely, leaving our users in the lurch, > the day to day activities of the project have to continue while we > are working towards compliance. > > There is precedence for this gap in ratifying a foundation and > implementing the dictats of that document; as Joey Hess reminded me: > when we first accepted the Social Contract and the DFSG, there was an > interval before we came into compliance (indeed, it is arguable if we > were ever completely in compliance -- see above about it being an on > going process). Indeed, there was a release of a minor version just > days after the DFSG was accepted, which by no means complied. > > We also did not yank out older releases, or drop support for them > immediately (as shown by the minor release). > > The binding principle here is that we have to balance the needs of > our users and the need to make Debian strictly free. As Raul miller > has stated: > > In my opinion, the needs of the free software community take > precedence in the context of adopting new packages, in the > setting of release goals, in our choices about infrastructure > and philosophy, and of course in the context of any > development work we do. > > In my opinion, the needs of our users take precedence in the > context of security fixes, in the context of support for > packages and systems we've released, and in the context of > the quality of our work. > > With this document, we, the Debian Project, do so affirm this. We > affirm that while we are working towards a change in the long term > goals and identity of the project, or any change in a foundation > document, the needs of the users shall not be catered to during the > transition period. > > We affirm that whenever a change in the Social Contract takes place, > the activities required to provide ongoing and proactive support for > versions of Debian that have already been released shall continue in > the period where we are working towards compliance. This includes, > but is not necessarily limited to, providing security updates, bug > fixes, preparing for the release of the next (compliant) release, > adopting new packages, and making point releases to refresh already > released versions of Debian. > > In the specific case of the GR 2004_003, since that current release, > code named "Sarge", is very close to release, and the previously > released version is quite out of date, our commitment to our users > dictates that the "Sarge" release should go on as planned, even while > we are trying to reach compliance with the Social Contract. This > exemption for "Sarge" applies to security releases, and point releases > as well. > > > > I am actively looking for seconds for this proposal. > > manoj > > -- > 3rd Law of Computing: Anything that can go wr fortune: Segmentation > violation -- Core dumped > Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> > 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E > 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Attachment:
pgpZRhlONByJB.pgp
Description: PGP signature