Re: sarge?

[David Fokkema <dfokkema@ileos.nl>]

On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 02:21:32PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 02:35:21PM +0200, David Fokkema wrote:
> > On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 11:27:23AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 05:54:38AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > > > I have been following the discussion from bits here, from
> > > > planet.debian.net and misc sources. I appreciate the effort that goes
> > > > into making Debian but I wish that it could be a bit pragmatic and
> > > > just temporarity suspend the issues relating to the most recent update
> > > > to the social contract and release the debian-installer and sarge and
> > > > let the world see the great stuff that has been brewing in the debian
> > > > laboratories.
> > > 
> > >   http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
> > 
> > I'm worried about the many alternative choices in this vote. Suppose 4:1
> > voters agree that the new social contract should be delayed so that
> > sarge can be released, but some think that it should be september, 1st,
> > some that sarge could take longer so do it after the release, some want
> > sarge released with a special notice saying the social contract changes
> > are ignored for this release etc. and none of the choices will get a 3:1
> > majority. That way sarge will not be released before 2005 whereas 4:1
> > people wanted it to.
> > Am I seeing things wrongly? I certainly hope so.
> 
> You're missing something, yes. The constitution only requires that the
> winning option has a 3:1 majority over "Further Discussion", not over
> every other option. It's not a problem.
> 
> (I had to check on this myself when proposing an amendment, though.)

I'm glad to hear it, thanks!

David

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into
your ~/.signature to help me spread!