Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation

[Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk>]

Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation"):
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:28:51 +0100, Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk> said: 
> > The TC could decide to make a new person the maintainer of the
> > policy package.
> 
>         You are correct, the TC could delegate their powers to any
>  one.

No, I mean according to the constitution 6.1(2) the TC is empowered to

   Decide on any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions
   overlap.

   In cases where Developers need to implement compatible ... stances
   (for example, if they disagree about ... who should be the
   maintainer for a package), the technical committee may decide the
   matter.

Since the TC is empowered to transfer a package between developers,
the DPL is _not_ empowered to do so unless it's urgent.  See s5.1.

>         However, the people who maintain the policy package are still
>  the maintainers -- and while they cannot make normative changes to
>  policy,

The people who maintain the policy package _are_ empowered to make
normative changes to policy.  I don't see how any other reading of
3.1(1) is possible, whether or not the policy maintainers are
Delegates.

You might say that only the TC has the power to make normative changes
to policy (is that what you're saying?) but this is obviously absurd
given 6.3(6):

   Technical Committee makes decisions only as last resort.

So the TC's power to determine policy is to overrule the policy
maintainers, not to stand in for them.  The TC is far too cumbersome
for use as the first-line of decisionmaking.

Also, if you think that according to the constitution only the TC has
the power to make normative changes to policy, what makes you think
the defined `policy process' has any legitimacy ?

Ian.