On 12/10/14 23:04, lee wrote:
Bas Wijnen <wijnen@debian.org> writes:Because for a GR, a member of Debian has to request it and it needs to be seconded by at least 5 other members (constitution 4.2.1, 4.2.7). This has not happened.I know, and I'm suggesting to omit this requirement.
Technically, there *is* a way for a GR to be brought forward for discussion and voting without having six DDs supporting it: the Project Leader can personally propose it. The Project Leader has not done so, and the Debian Constitution does not place any obligation on the holder of the post of Project Leader to propose any particular General Resolution.
Any change to these constitutional arrangements would require the Debian Constitution to be amended, which (per the Constitution) requires a General Resolution validly proposed under the existing arrangements and then passed by a 3:1 supermajority in the ensuing vote.
I would argue in any event that it's probably inappropriate for the Project Leader to propose a General Resolution which has already been proposed by a DD and failed to receive the required number of sponsors.
Then they shouldn't say in their social contract that the users and their needs are the priority.
It is precisely *because* decisions in Debian are not made by the users-at-large, but only by the Debian developers, that the social contract by which the developers are expected to abide when working on the Debian project must explicitly state that the interests and needs of the users are important.
This, of course, leads us to two interesting points: 1) the Debian Developers are themselves users of Debian2) the Debian user community is not a monolithic entity whose constituent parts have uniform and identical interests and needs
Besides, I very much doubt a proposal to redraft the DSC in a way that removed the passages about the importance of the users would receive even a 1:1 majority, let alone the 3:1 majority required to supersede one of the constitutionally-designated Foundational Documents.