Re: Amendment to the Constitution: Add a new foundation document
Here is the current version
manoj.
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. The context diff follows.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1. A Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as
critical to the Project's mission and purposes.
2. The Foundation Documents are the works entitled `Debian
- Social Contract' and `Debian Free Software Guidelines'.
+ Social Contract', `Transition Guide' and
+ `Debian Free Software Guidelines'.
3. 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existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation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.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
The attached Transition guide is:
Transition Guide
A working guide to achieve the transition for changes in Foundation documents
containing explanations and Rationale, and defining
guidelines for future transitions
The Social Contract represents the core commitments of the Project.
The Social Contract leaves its marks in many ways; it is deeply
intertwined with all parts of the Project. Potentially, any change to
the Social Contract has major ramifications, and may require a period
of potentially deep changes to the roots of the Project before it can
come into compliance with the changed Contract.
Meeting our commitments as described in the Social Contact is an
ongoing process. Whenever we change these commitments, we may need an
interval of time before we can approach compliance. Unless we shut
down the Project completely - abandoning users and our developers -
the regular activities of the Project must continue while we work
towards compliance.
There is precedent for a gap between ratifying a change to the
foundation documents of the Project and implementing dictates of that
document; when the Project first accepted the Social Contract and the
Debian Free Software Guidelines, there was an interval before we came
into compliance with those then-new documents. Indeed, a minor version
was released just days after the Debian Free Software Guidelines were
accepted, and this release by no means complied with the new
commitments.
We also continued to support older non-complying releases, and did not
make them unavailable to our users.
The binding principle here is that we have to balance the needs of our
users and the need to make Debian strictly free. As one developer has
said:
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.
We, the Debian Project, do so affirm this judgmen. While we are
working towards complying with a change in the goals or identity of
the Project, or towards compliance with any change to a foundation
document, the needs of our users will be catered to. This may mean
that for a limited time, Debian will not be compliant with the new
Social Contract.
Whenever a change to our foundation documents takes place, the
activities required to provide ongoing and proactive support for the
Debian user community shall continue. This includes, but is not
necessarily limited to, providing security updates for
previously-released versions of Debian, providing point-release
updates to previously-released versions of Debian, preparing for the
next (compliant) release of Debian, actually releasing the current
non-compliant version of Debian if such a release is imminent (as well
as any further updates to that version of Debian), and providing all
the Project's infrastructure such as bug-tracking and mailing lists.
In the specific case of General Resolution 2004_003, since that
release currently in preparation, 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 in the process of reaching compliance
with the new Social Contract. This exemption for "Sarge" applies to
security releases and point releases as well.
Rationale
My intent was not just to find a way for us to allow to release Sarge,
it was to create a guideline to help ease us through major changes in
something like the Social contract, or the constitution. The fact that
a generic transition guide may help us also release Sarge soon is a
nice side effect.
It has been suggested that transitioning ought to be handled in the
original proposal itself, and yes, that is a good idea. But foresight
is weak, compared to 8/20 hind sight, and there may be unforeseen
consequences of a proposed change that were not evident while drafting
the proposal.
Nothing is perfect. I would much rather we also had a process defined
to pick up the pieces if the before-the-fact transition plan blew up
in our face; this is way better than relying on perfect foresight in
transition plans.
The other issue addressed in the proposal is one of choosing between
two different requirements of the social contract; and how to balance
these different requirements when some of these requirements are
changed.
Since this modifies the Constitution, this requires a 3:1 majority to
pass.
--
Tell the truth or trump--but get the trick. Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead
Wilson's Calendar"
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
Reply to: