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

Re: Position statements short of a GR - DPL statements

Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Position statements short of a GR - DPL statements"):
> I just noted that, looking at our constitution from a formal point
> of view, it does not answer directly to the questions "who represent
> Debian ?" and "who can define Debian's opinion",

I'm confused.  Are you are, or are you not, objecting to the idea of
the DPL establishing a section of the website where they provide some
statements of their opinion about matters relating to Debian ?

If you are not objecting then there is no problem.  I don't think
anyone else has objected here.  So Zack should go ahead and do that.

If you are objecting, then please explain why you object to that but
not to statements of opinion (many of which are on www.d.o) from other
individuals role holders and informal (not constitutionally
established) teams ?

> and proposed an interpretation that is in line with some
> argumentations read earlier, that a GR was necessary for our project
> to declare formally that everybody is welcome.

My view is that the diversity statement needed a GR not for formal
reasons but to demonstrate in the face of objections that the project
was solidly behind the diversity statement.  By its nature the
diversity statement is non-binding and it has its effect through the
fact that it has been demonstrated to have overwhelming support.  That
demonstration required a GR.


Reply to: