Re: xth wrap-up about statement on diversity, statement may be issued without general resolution
Russ Allbery writes:
> [re diversity statement]
> That's actually part of the reason why I, personally, would like it to be
> a GR. I'd like to see the Debian Project make that statement, and putting
> the stamp of official blessing of a GR on it does make that statement
> somewhat stronger (and hence somewhat more effective in extending that
> > The problem with a strict interpretation of the Constitution is for
> > instance that there are other documents in a somewhat similar case as
> > the diversity welcoming message, like the « Debian Position on Software
> > Patents ».
> Personally, I think there would be a lot of merit in holding a GR on that
> as well. Legal issues are always highly contentious, and it's easier to
> tell people to follow that position with their Debian work when it's been
> voted on as a GR.
I disagree on this one, at least in its current form. The Software
Patents document is a mixture of position statement (for outsiders to
see what our view is) and internal process advice (for insiders and
allies to know what to do).
I don't think the latter should be the subject of a GR. Otherwise the
logical conclusion is that we may end up voting on the developers'
reference. And because I don't think it makes sense to vote on
whether we agree with legal advice.