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

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 01:50:37AM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>>  b) Delaying a decision of a Delegate or the DPL [§4.2(2.2)],
>>     as well as resolutions against a shortening of discussion/voting
>>     period or to overwrite a TC decision [§4.2(2.3)] requires floor(Q)
>>     developers to sponsor the resolution.
>>  c) the definition of K gets erased from the constitution. [§4.2(7)]
>what I'd like to add here is something in the lines of
>d) If a resolution will affect an upcoming release which is already 
>   frozen, the resolution needs twice the number of sponsors as defined 
>   in a).
>This should help to avoid that some random people try to stop a release 
>in the latest moment if there's not a really good reason to do so. If 
>we want Debian to be used in business ("enterprise" *gasp*) 
>installations, we should at least be able to tell people when we're 
>about to release, without having them to fear a delay for months or 
>years due to a GR.

I disagree: Debian release when ready, not in time. Which is good!

If anyone creates a vote close to (expected) release, then they have a 
good reason to do that. Which we should not suppress by designing our 
rules to favor releasing "in time".

  - Jonas

- -- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: