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

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
> welcome).

I agree.

> > 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.


Reply to: