r10636 - in /packages/trunk/doc-debian: debian/changelog debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text doc/Makefile doc/constitution.1.4.wml doc/constitution.wml
Author: jfs
Date: Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
New Revision: 10636
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/?sc=1&rev=10636
Log:
Patch provided by Stefano Zacchiroli:
* Update the Constitution to version 1.5, as per "General Resolution:
Limiting the term of the technical committee members",
https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_004 (Closes: #777350)
Added:
packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.1.4.wml
Modified:
packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/changelog
packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text
packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/Makefile
packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.wml
Modified: packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/changelog
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/changelog?rev=10636&op=diff
==============================================================================
--- packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/changelog (original)
+++ packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/changelog Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+doc-debian (6.3) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ [ Stefano Zacchiroli ]
+ * Update the Constitution to version 1.5, as per "General Resolution:
+ Limiting the term of the technical committee members",
+ https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_004 (Closes: #777350)
+
+ -- Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:39:43 +0100
+
doc-debian (6.2) unstable; urgency=medium
* Team upload
Modified: packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text?rev=10636&op=diff
==============================================================================
--- packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text (original)
+++ packages/trunk/doc-debian/debian/doc-debian.doc-base.debian-constitution-text Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
@@ -2,10 +2,12 @@
Title: Debian Constitution
Author: The Debian Project
Abstract: This document contains the complete text of Debian Project
- Constitution (v1.3), in text format. Version 1.3 ratified on
- September 24th, 2006. Supersedes version 1.2 ratified on October
- 29th, 2003. Supersedes Version 1.1 ratified on June 21st, 2003,
- which itself supersedes Version 1.0 ratified on December 2nd, 1998
+ Constitution (v1.5), in text format. Version 1.5, ratified on
+ January 9th, 2015, supersedes Version 1.4, ratified on October 7th,
+ 2007, Version 1.3 ratified on September 24th, 2006, version 1.2
+ ratified on October 29th, 2003, Version 1.1 ratified on June 21st,
+ 2003, which itself supersedes Version 1.0 ratified on December 2nd,
+ 1998.
Section: Debian
Format: text
Modified: packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/Makefile
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/Makefile?rev=10636&op=diff
==============================================================================
--- packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/Makefile (original)
+++ packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/Makefile Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
@@ -12,7 +12,8 @@
bug-log-mailserver.wml bug-reporting.wml \
bug-mailserver-refcard.wml constitution.wml social-contract.wml \
bug-maint-info.wml constitution.1.1.wml social-contract.1.0.wml \
-constitution.1.2.wml social-contract.wml constitution.1.3.wml
+constitution.1.2.wml social-contract.wml constitution.1.3.wml \
+constitution.1.4.wml
# These are the automatic files we can generate:
TXTFILES = $(subst .wml,.txt,$(WMLFILES))
Added: packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.1.4.wml
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.1.4.wml?rev=10636&op=file
==============================================================================
--- packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.1.4.wml (added)
+++ packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.1.4.wml Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
@@ -0,0 +1,968 @@
+
+<h1>Constitution for the Debian Project (v1.4)</h1>
+
+
+<p>Version 1.4 ratified on October 7th, 2007. Supersedes
+<a href="constitution.1.3">Version 1.3</a> ratified on September 24th,
+2006,
+<a href="constitution.1.2">Version 1.2</a> ratified on October 29th,
+2003 and
+<a href="constitution.1.1">Version 1.1</a> ratified on June 21st,
+2003, which itself supersedes <a href="constitution.1.0">Version 1.0</a>
+ratified on December 2nd, 1998.</p>
+
+<toc-display />
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-1">1. Introduction</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<p><cite>The Debian Project is an association of individuals who have
+made common cause to create a free operating system.</cite></p>
+
+<p>This document describes the organisational structure for formal
+decision-making in the Project. It does not describe the goals of the
+Project or how it achieves them, or contain any policies except those
+directly related to the decision-making process.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-2">2. Decision-making bodies and individuals</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<p>Each decision in the Project is made by one or more of the
+following:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>The Developers, by way of General Resolution or an election;</li>
+
+ <li>The Project Leader;</li>
+
+ <li>The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;</li>
+
+ <li>The individual Developer working on a particular task;</li>
+
+ <li>Delegates appointed by the Project Leader for specific
+ tasks;</li>
+
+ <li>The Project Secretary.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Most of the remainder of this document will outline the powers of
+these bodies, their composition and appointment, and the procedure for
+their decision-making. The powers of a person or body may be subject to
+review and/or limitation by others; in this case the reviewing body or
+person's entry will state this. <cite>In the list above, a person or
+body is usually listed before any people or bodies whose decisions they
+can overrule or who they (help) appoint - but not everyone listed
+earlier can overrule everyone listed later.</cite></p>
+
+<h3>2.1. General rules</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Nothing in this constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to
+ do work for the Project. A person who does not want to do a task
+ which has been delegated or assigned to them does not need to do
+ it. However, they must not actively work against these rules and
+ decisions properly made under them.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>A person may hold several posts, except that the Project Leader,
+ Project Secretary and the Chairman of the Technical Committee must
+ be distinct, and that the Leader cannot appoint themselves as their
+ own Delegate.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>A person may leave the Project or resign from a particular post
+ they hold, at any time, by stating so publicly.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-3">3. Individual Developers</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>3.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>An individual Developer may</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>make any technical or nontechnical decision with regard to their
+ own work;</li>
+
+ <li>propose or sponsor draft General Resolutions;</li>
+
+ <li>propose themselves as a Project Leader candidate in
+ elections;</li>
+
+ <li>vote on General Resolutions and in Leadership elections.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>3.2. Composition and appointment</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Developers are volunteers who agree to further the aims of the
+ Project insofar as they participate in it, and who maintain
+ package(s) for the Project or do other work which the Project
+ Leader's Delegate(s) consider worthwhile.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>The Project Leader's Delegate(s) may choose not to admit new
+ Developers, or expel existing Developers. <cite>If the Developers
+ feel that the Delegates are abusing their authority they can of
+ course override the decision by way of General Resolution - see
+ §4.1(3), §4.2.</cite></p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>3.3. Procedure</h3>
+
+<p>Developers may make these decisions as they see fit.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-4">4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>4.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>Together, the Developers may:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Appoint or recall the Project Leader.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1
+ majority.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the Project
+ Leader or a Delegate.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the Technical
+ Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Issue, supersede and withdraw nontechnical policy documents and
+ statements.</p>
+
+ <p>These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
+ relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
+ policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
+ software must meet.</p>
+
+ <p>They may also include position statements about issues of the
+ day.</p>
+
+ <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>
+ <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>
+
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make decisions about property held in trust for purposes
+ related to Debian. (See §9.).</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>In case of a disagreement between the project leader and
+ the incumbent secretary, appoint a new secretary.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>4.2. Procedure</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>The Developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below.
+ A resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any
+ Developer and sponsored by at least K other Developers, or if
+ proposed by the Project Leader or the Technical Committee.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Delaying a decision by the Project Leader or their Delegate:</p>
+
+ <ol>
+ <li>If the Project Leader or their Delegate, or the Technical
+ Committee, has made a decision, then Developers can override them
+ by passing a resolution to do so; see §4.1(3).</li>
+
+ <li>If such a resolution is sponsored by at least 2K Developers,
+ or if it is proposed by the Technical Committee, the resolution
+ puts the decision immediately on hold (provided that resolution
+ itself says so).</li>
+
+ <li>If the original decision was to change a discussion period or
+ a voting period, or the resolution is to override the Technical
+ Committee, then only K Developers need to sponsor the resolution
+ to be able to put the decision immediately on hold.</li>
+
+ <li>If the decision is put on hold, an immediate vote is held to
+ determine whether the decision will stand until the full vote on
+ the decision is made or whether the implementation of the
+ original decision will be delayed until then. There is no
+ quorum for this immediate procedural vote.</li>
+
+ <li>If the Project Leader (or the Delegate) withdraws the
+ original decision, the vote becomes moot, and is no longer
+ conducted.</li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>
+ Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
+ results are not revealed during the voting period; after the
+ vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast. The voting
+ period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the
+ Project Leader.
+ </p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by
+ up to 1 week by the Project Leader. The Project Leader has a
+ casting vote. There is a quorum of 3Q.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Proposals, sponsors, amendments, calls for votes and other
+ formal actions are made by announcement on a publicly-readable
+ electronic mailing list designated by the Project Leader's
+ Delegate(s); any Developer may post there.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Votes are cast by email in a manner suitable to the Secretary.
+ The Secretary determines for each poll whether voters can change
+ their votes.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Q is half of the square root of the number of current
+ Developers. K is Q or 5, whichever is the smaller. Q and K need not
+ be integers and are not rounded.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-5">5. Project Leader</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>5.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>The <a href="leader">Project Leader</a> may:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Appoint Delegates or delegate decisions to the Technical
+ Committee.</p>
+
+ <p>The Leader may define an area of ongoing responsibility or a
+ specific decision and hand it over to another Developer or to the
+ Technical Committee.</p>
+
+ <p>Once a particular decision has been delegated and made the
+ Project Leader may not withdraw that delegation; however, they may
+ withdraw an ongoing delegation of particular area of
+ responsibility.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Lend authority to other Developers.</p>
+
+ <p>The Project Leader may make statements of support for points of
+ view or for other members of the project, when asked or otherwise;
+ these statements have force if and only if the Leader would be
+ empowered to make the decision in question.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make any decision which requires urgent action.</p>
+
+ <p>This does not apply to decisions which have only become
+ gradually urgent through lack of relevant action, unless there is a
+ fixed deadline.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make any decision for whom noone else has responsibility.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Propose draft General Resolutions and amendments.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Together with the Technical Committee, appoint new members to
+ the Committee. (See §6.2.)</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Use a casting vote when Developers vote.</p>
+
+ <p>The Project Leader also has a normal vote in such ballots.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Vary the discussion period for Developers' votes (as above).</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Lead discussions amongst Developers.</p>
+
+ <p>The Project Leader should attempt to participate in discussions
+ amongst the Developers in a helpful way which seeks to bring the
+ discussion to bear on the key issues at hand. The Project Leader
+ should not use the Leadership position to promote their own
+ personal views.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting
+ property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
+ §9.). Such decisions are communicated to the members by the
+ Project Leader or their Delegate(s). Major expenditures
+ should be proposed and debated on the mailing list before
+ funds are disbursed.</p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <p>Add or remove organizations from the list of trusted
+ organizations (see §9.3) that are authorized to accept and
+ hold assets for Debian. The evaluation and discussion leading
+ up to such a decision occurs on an electronic mailing list
+ designated by the Project Leader or their Delegate(s), on
+ which any developer may post. There is a minimum discussion
+ period of two weeks before an organization may be added to
+ the list of trusted organizations.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>5.2. Appointment</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>The Project Leader is elected by the Developers.</li>
+
+ <li>The election begins six weeks before the leadership post becomes
+ vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.</li>
+
+ <li>For the first week any Developer may nominate
+ themselves as a candidate Project Leader, and summarize their plans for their term.</li>
+
+ <li>For three weeks after that no more candidates may be nominated;
+ candidates should use this time for campaigning and discussion. If
+ there are no candidates at the end of the nomination period then the
+ nomination period is extended for an additional week, repeatedly if
+ necessary.</li>
+
+ <li>The next two weeks are the polling period during which
+ Developers may cast their votes. Votes in leadership elections are
+ kept secret, even after the election is finished.</li>
+
+ <li>The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have
+ nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of The
+ Above. If None Of The Above wins the election then the election
+ procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.</li>
+
+ <li>
+ The decision will be made using the method specified in section
+ §A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. The quorum is the
+ same as for a General Resolution (§4.2) and the default
+ option is <q>None Of The Above</q>.
+ </li>
+
+ <li>The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>5.3. Procedure</h3>
+
+<p>The Project Leader should attempt to make decisions which are
+consistent with the consensus of the opinions of the Developers.</p>
+
+<p>Where practical the Project Leader should informally solicit the
+views of the Developers.</p>
+
+<p>The Project Leader should avoid overemphasizing their own point of
+view when making decisions in their capacity as Leader.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-6">6. Technical committee</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>6.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>The <a href="tech-ctte">Technical Committee</a> may:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Decide on any matter of technical policy.</p>
+
+ <p>This includes the contents of the technical policy manuals,
+ developers' reference materials, example packages and the behaviour
+ of non-experimental package building tools. (In each case the usual
+ maintainer of the relevant software or documentation makes
+ decisions initially, however; see 6.3(5).)</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions
+ overlap.</p>
+
+ <p>In cases where Developers need to implement compatible
+ technical policies or stances (for example, if they disagree about
+ the priorities of conflicting packages, or about ownership of a
+ command name, or about which package is responsible for a bug that
+ both maintainers agree is a bug, or about who should be the
+ maintainer for a package) the technical committee may decide the
+ matter.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Make a decision when asked to do so.</p>
+
+ <p>Any person or body may delegate a decision of their own to the
+ Technical Committee, or seek advice from it.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).</p>
+
+ <p>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.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Offer advice.</p>
+
+ <p>The Technical Committee may make formal announcements about its
+ views on any matter. <cite>Individual members may of course make
+ informal statements about their views and about the likely views of
+ the committee.</cite></p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Together with the Project Leader, appoint new members to itself
+ or remove existing members. (See §6.2.)</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Appoint the Chairman of the Technical Committee.</p>
+
+ <p>
+ The Chairman is elected by the Committee from its members. All
+ members of the committee are automatically nominated; the
+ committee votes starting one week before the post will become
+ vacant (or immediately, if it is already too late). The members
+ may vote by public acclamation for any fellow committee member,
+ including themselves; there is no default option. The vote
+ finishes when all the members have voted, or when the voting
+ period has ended. The result is determined using the method
+ specified in section A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure.
+ </p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>The Chairman can stand in for the Leader, together with the
+ Secretary</p>
+
+ <p>As detailed in §7.1(2), the Chairman of the Technical
+ Committee and the Project Secretary may together stand in for the
+ Leader if there is no Leader.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>6.2. Composition</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>The Technical Committee consists of up to 8 Developers, and
+ should usually have at least 4 members.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>When there are fewer than 8 members the Technical Committee may
+ recommend new member(s) to the Project Leader, who may choose
+ (individually) to appoint them or not.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>When there are 5 members or fewer the Technical Committee may
+ appoint new member(s) until the number of members reaches 6.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>When there have been 5 members or fewer for at least one week
+ the Project Leader may appoint new member(s) until the number of
+ members reaches 6, at intervals of at least one week per
+ appointment.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they
+ may remove or replace an existing member of the Technical
+ Committee.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>6.3. Procedure</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>The Technical Committee uses the Standard Resolution
+ Procedure.</p>
+
+ <p>A draft resolution or amendment may be proposed by any member
+ of the Technical Committee. There is no minimum discussion period;
+ the voting period lasts for up to one week, or until the outcome is
+ no longer in doubt. Members may change their votes. There is a
+ quorum of two.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Details regarding voting</p>
+
+ <p>The Chairman has a casting vote. When the Technical Committee
+ votes whether to override a Developer who also happens to be a
+ member of the Committee, that member may not vote (unless they are
+ the Chairman, in which case they may use only their casting
+ vote).</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Public discussion and decision-making.</p>
+
+ <p>Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by
+ members of the committee, are made public on the Technical
+ Committee public discussion list. There is no separate secretary
+ for the Committee.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Confidentiality of appointments.</p>
+
+ <p>The Technical Committee may hold confidential discussions via
+ private email or a private mailing list or other means to discuss
+ appointments to the Committee. However, votes on appointments must
+ be public.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>No detailed design work.</p>
+
+ <p>The Technical Committee does not engage in design of new
+ proposals and policies. Such design work should be carried out by
+ individuals privately or together and discussed in ordinary
+ technical policy and design forums.</p>
+
+ <p>The Technical Committee restricts itself to choosing from or
+ adopting compromises between solutions and decisions which have
+ been proposed and reasonably thoroughly discussed elsewhere.</p>
+
+ <p><cite>Individual members of the technical committee may of
+ course participate on their own behalf in any aspect of design and
+ policy work.</cite></p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Technical Committee makes decisions only as last resort.</p>
+
+ <p>The Technical Committee does not make a technical decision
+ until efforts to resolve it via consensus have been tried and
+ failed, unless it has been asked to make a decision by the person
+ or body who would normally be responsible for it.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-7">7. The Project Secretary</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>7.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>The <a href="secretary">Secretary</a>:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Takes votes amongst the Developers, and determines the number
+ and identity of Developers, whenever this is required by the
+ constitution.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Can stand in for the Leader, together with the Chairman of the
+ Technical Committee.</p>
+
+ <p>If there is no Project Leader then the Chairman of the
+ Technical Committee and the Project Secretary may by joint
+ agreement make decisions if they consider it imperative to do
+ so.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Adjudicates any disputes about interpretation of the
+ constitution.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>May delegate part or all of their authority to someone else, or
+ withdraw such a delegation at any time.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>7.2. Appointment</h3>
+
+<p>The Project Secretary is appointed by the Project Leader and the
+current Project Secretary.</p>
+
+<p>If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot agree
+on a new appointment, they must ask the Developers by way of
+General Resolution to appoint a Secretary.</p>
+
+<p>If there is no Project Secretary or the current Secretary is
+unavailable and has not delegated authority for a decision then the
+decision may be made or delegated by the Chairman of the Technical
+Committee, as Acting Secretary.</p>
+
+<p>The Project Secretary's term of office is 1 year, at which point
+they or another Secretary must be (re)appointed.</p>
+
+<h3>7.3. Procedure</h3>
+
+<p>The Project Secretary should make decisions which are fair and
+reasonable, and preferably consistent with the consensus of the
+Developers.</p>
+
+<p>When acting together to stand in for an absent Project Leader the
+Chairman of the Technical Committee and the Project Secretary should
+make decisions only when absolutely necessary and only when consistent
+with the consensus of the Developers.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-8">8. The Project Leader's Delegates</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<h3>8.1. Powers</h3>
+
+<p>The Project Leader's Delegates:</p>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>have powers delegated to them by the Project Leader;</li>
+
+ <li>may make certain decisions which the Leader may not make
+ directly, including approving or expelling Developers or designating
+ people as Developers who do not maintain packages. <cite>This is to
+ avoid concentration of power, particularly over membership as a
+ Developer, in the hands of the Project Leader.</cite></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>8.2. Appointment</h3>
+
+<p>The Delegates are appointed by the Project Leader and may be
+replaced by the Leader at the Leader's discretion. The Project Leader
+may not make the position as a Delegate conditional on particular
+decisions by the Delegate, nor may they override a decision made by a
+Delegate once made.</p>
+
+<h3>8.3. Procedure</h3>
+
+<p>Delegates may make decisions as they see fit, but should attempt to
+implement good technical decisions and/or follow consensus opinion.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-9">9. Assets held in trust for Debian</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<p>In most jurisdictions around the world, the Debian project is not
+in a position to directly hold funds or other property. Therefore,
+property has to be owned by any of a number of organisations as
+detailed in §9.2.</p>
+
+<p>Traditionally, SPI was the sole organisation authorized to hold
+property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in
+the U.S. to hold money in trust there.</p>
+
+<p><a href="http://www.spi-inc.org/";>SPI</a> and Debian are separate
+organisations who share some goals.
+Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI.</p>
+
+<h3>9.1. Relationship with Associated Organizations</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>Debian Developers do not become agents or employees of
+ organisations holding assets in trust for Debian, or of
+ each other, or of persons in authority in the Debian Project,
+ solely by the virtue of being Debian Developers. A person
+ acting as a Developer does so as an individual, on their own
+ behalf. Such organisations may, of their own accord,
+ establish relationships with individuals who are also Debian
+ developers.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>9.2. Authority</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>An organisation holding assets for Debian has no authority
+ regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical decisions, except
+ that no decision by Debian with respect to any property held
+ by the organisation shall require it to act outside its legal
+ authority.</p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <p>Debian claims no authority over an organisation that holds
+ assets for Debian other than that over the use of property
+ held in trust for Debian.</p>
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>9.3. Trusted organisations</h3>
+
+<p>Any donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a
+set of organisations designated by the Project leader (or a
+delegate) to be authorized to handle assets to be used for the
+Debian Project.</p>
+
+<p>Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should
+undertake reasonable obligations for the handling of such
+assets.</p>
+
+<p>Debian maintains a public List of Trusted Organisations that
+accept donations and hold assets in trust for Debian
+(including both tangible property and intellectual property)
+that includes the commitments those organisations have made as
+to how those assets will be handled.</p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-A">A. Standard Resolution Procedure</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<p>These rules apply to communal decision-making by committees and
+plebiscites, where stated above.</p>
+
+<h3>A.1. Proposal</h3>
+
+<p>The formal procedure begins when a draft resolution is proposed and
+sponsored, as required.</p>
+
+<h3>A.1. Discussion and Amendment</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed.
+ Amendments may be made formal by being proposed and sponsored
+ according to the requirements for a new resolution, or directly by
+ the proposer of the original resolution.</li>
+
+ <li>A formal amendment may be accepted by the resolution's proposer,
+ in which case the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to
+ match.</li>
+
+ <li>If a formal amendment is not accepted, or one of the sponsors of
+ the resolution does not agree with the acceptance by the proposer of
+ a formal amendment, the amendment remains as an amendment and will be
+ voted on.</li>
+
+ <li>If an amendment accepted by the original proposer is not to the
+ liking of others, they may propose another amendment to reverse the
+ earlier change (again, they must meet the requirements for proposer
+ and sponsor(s).)</li>
+
+ <li>The proposer of a resolution may suggest changes to the wordings
+ of amendments; these take effect if the proposer of the amendment
+ agrees and none of the sponsors object. In this case the changed
+ amendments will be voted on instead of the originals.</li>
+
+ <li>The proposer of a resolution may make changes to correct minor
+ errors (for example, typographical errors or inconsistencies) or
+ changes which do not alter the meaning, providing noone objects
+ within 24 hours. In this case the minimum discussion period is not
+ restarted.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>A.2. Calling for a vote</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>The proposer or a sponsor of a motion or an amendment may call
+ for a vote, providing that the minimum discussion period (if any) has
+ elapsed.</li>
+
+ <li>
+ The proposer or any sponsor of a resolution may call for a vote on that
+ resolution and all related amendments.
+ </li>
+
+ <li>The person who calls for a vote states what they believe the
+ wordings of the resolution and any relevant amendments are, and
+ consequently what form the ballot should take. However, the final
+ decision on the form of ballot(s) is the Secretary's - see 7.1(1),
+ 7.1(3) and A.3(4).</li>
+
+ <li>
+ The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last
+ formal amendment was accepted, or since the whole resolution
+ was proposed if no amendments have been proposed and accepted.
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>A.3. Voting procedure</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li>
+ Each resolution and its related amendments is voted on in a
+ single ballot that includes an option for the original
+ resolution, each amendment, and the default option (where
+ applicable).
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ The default option must not have any supermajority requirements.
+ Options which do not have an explicit supermajority requirement
+ have a 1:1 majority requirement.
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ The votes are counted according to the rules in A.6. The
+ default option is <q>Further Discussion</q>, unless specified
+ otherwise.
+ </li>
+
+ <li>In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on matters
+ of procedure.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>A.4. Withdrawing resolutions or unaccepted amendments</h3>
+
+<p>The proposer of a resolution or unaccepted amendment may withdraw
+it. In this case new proposers may come forward keep it alive, in which
+case the first person to do so becomes the new proposer and any others
+become sponsors if they aren't sponsors already.</p>
+
+<p>A sponsor of a resolution or amendment (unless it has been
+accepted) may withdraw.</p>
+
+<p>If the withdrawal of the proposer and/or sponsors means that a
+resolution has no proposer or not enough sponsors it will not be voted
+on unless this is rectified before the resolution expires.</p>
+
+<h3>A.5. Expiry</h3>
+
+<p>
+ If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on or
+ otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks the secretary may issue a statement
+ that the issue is being withdrawn. If none of the sponsors of any
+ of the proposals object within a week, the issue is withdrawn.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+ The secretary may also include suggestions on how to proceed,
+ if appropriate.
+</p>
+
+<h3>A.6. Vote Counting</h3>
+
+<ol>
+ <li> Each voter's ballot ranks the options being voted on. Not all
+ options need be ranked. Ranked options are considered
+ preferred to all unranked options. Voters may rank options
+ equally. Unranked options are considered to be ranked equally
+ with one another. Details of how ballots may be filled out
+ will be included in the Call For Votes.
+ </li>
+ <li> If the ballot has a quorum requirement R any options other
+ than the default option which do not receive at least R votes
+ ranking that option above the default option are dropped from
+ consideration.
+ </li>
+ <li> Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default option
+ by its required majority ratio is dropped from consideration.
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters
+ who prefer option A over option B.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ An option A defeats the default option D by a majority
+ ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ratio
+ is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1.
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li> From the list of undropped options, we generate a list of
+ pairwise defeats.
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ An option A defeats an option B, if V(A,B) is strictly greater
+ than V(B,A).
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li> From the list of [undropped] pairwise defeats, we generate a
+ set of transitive defeats.
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ An option A transitively defeats an option C if A defeats
+ C or if there is some other option B where A defeats B AND
+ B transitively defeats C.
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li> We construct the Schwartz set from the set of transitive defeats.
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ An option A is in the Schwartz set if for all options B,
+ either A transitively defeats B, or B does not transitively
+ defeat A.
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li> If there are defeats between options in the Schwartz set,
+ we drop the weakest such defeats from the list of pairwise
+ defeats, and return to step 5.
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ A defeat (A,X) is weaker than a defeat (B,Y) if V(A,X)
+ is less than V(B,Y). Also, (A,X) is weaker than (B,Y) if
+ V(A,X) is equal to V(B,Y) and V(X,A) is greater than V(Y,B).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ A weakest defeat is a defeat that has no other defeat weaker
+ than it. There may be more than one such defeat.
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li> If there are no defeats within the Schwartz set, then the winner
+ is chosen from the options in the Schwartz set. If there is
+ only one such option, it is the winner. If there are multiple
+ options, the elector with the casting vote chooses which of those
+ options wins.
+ </li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>
+ <strong>Note:</strong> Options which the voters rank above the default option
+ are options they find acceptable. Options ranked below the default
+ options are options they find unacceptable.
+</p>
+
+<p><cite>When the Standard Resolution Procedure is to be used, the text
+which refers to it must specify what is sufficient to have a draft
+resolution proposed and/or sponsored, what the minimum discussion
+period is, and what the voting period is. It must also specify any
+supermajority and/or the quorum (and default option) to be
+used.</cite></p>
+
+<h2><toc-add-entry name="item-B">B. Use of language and typography</toc-add-entry></h2>
+
+<p>The present indicative (<q>is</q>, for example) means that the statement
+is a rule in this constitution. <q>May</q> or <q>can</q> indicates that the
+person or body has discretion. <q>Should</q> means that it would be
+considered a good thing if the sentence were obeyed, but it is not
+binding. <cite>Text marked as a citation, such as this, is rationale
+and does not form part of the constitution. It may be used only to aid
+interpretation in cases of doubt.</cite></p>
Modified: packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.wml
URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.wml?rev=10636&op=diff
==============================================================================
--- packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.wml (original)
+++ packages/trunk/doc-debian/doc/constitution.wml Tue Feb 17 23:41:23 2015
@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
-<h1>Constitution for the Debian Project (v1.4)</h1>
+<h1>Constitution for the Debian Project (v1.5)</h1>
-<p>Version 1.4 ratified on October 7th, 2007. Supersedes
+<p>Version 1.5 ratified on January 9th, 2015. Supersedes
+<a href="constitution.1.4">Version 1.4</a> ratified on October 7th,
+2007,
<a href="constitution.1.3">Version 1.3</a> ratified on September 24th,
2006,
<a href="constitution.1.2">Version 1.2</a> ratified on October 29th,
@@ -508,9 +510,35 @@
</li>
<li>
+ <p>A Developer is not eligible to be (re)appointed to the Technical
+ Committee if they have been a member within the previous 12
+ months.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
<p>If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they
may remove or replace an existing member of the Technical
Committee.</p>
+ </li>
+
+ <li>
+ <p>Term limit:</p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ <p>On January 1st of each year the term of any Committee member
+ who has served more than 42 months (3.5 years) and who is one
+ of the two most senior members is set to expire on December
+ 31st of that year.</p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <p>A member of the Technical Committee is said to be more
+ senior than another if they were appointed earlier, or were
+ appointed at the same time and have been a member of the
+ Debian Project longer. In the event that a member has been
+ appointed more than once, only the most recent appointment is
+ relevant.</p>
+ </li>
+ </ol>
</li>
</ol>
Reply to: