Re: PROPOSED: [CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT] Alternate disambiguation of 4.1.5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
iOn Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Indeed, I had proposed this in -project on the 19th of
> July. This addresses the same ambiguity that Brandon does in his
> proposal, but in a distincly different fashion. I would suggest that
> this should be offered as an alternative to Brandon's proposal, if it
> comes to a vote (if the rules lawyers deem that permissible). If not,
> this may stand on its own (leaving open the possibility that both,
> almost opposite, amendments may be accepted).
> I am now looking for seconds for this proposal.
> 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
> 4.1. Powers
> Together, the Developers may:
> 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader.
> 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority.
> 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
> 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they
> agree with a 2:1 majority.
> - 5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.
> - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
> - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
> - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
> - software must meet.
> - They may also include position statements about issues of the day.
> + 5. Issue, modify and withdraw nontechnical policy documents and statements.
> + These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
> + relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
> + policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
> + software must meet.
> + They may also include position statements about issues of the day.
> + 5.1 A special clause applies to the documents labelled as
> + "Foundation Documents". These documents are those
> + that are deemed to be critical to the core of the project,
> + they tend to define what the project is, and lay the
> + foundations of its structure. The developers may
> + modify a foundation document provided they agree with a 3:1
> + majority.
> -- + 5.2 Initially, the list of foundation Documents consists
> + of this document, The Debian Constitution, as well as the
> + documents known as the Debian GNU/Linux Social Contract and the
> + Debian Free Software Guidelines. The list of the documents
> + that are deemed to be "Foundation Documents" may be changed
> + by the developers provided they agree with a 3:1 majority.
> 6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
> property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
> Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen recently to be quite
> ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two
> wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying language to
> the constitution about _changing_ or withdrawing nontechnical documents.
> Additionally, this also provides for the core, or Foundation, documents of
> the project the same protection against hasty changes that the
> constitution itself enjoys.
> If you are what you eat, does that mean Euell Gibbons really was a
> Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
> 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
> ------------ Output from gpg ------------
> gpg: Good signature from "Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org>"
> gpg: aka "Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com>"
> gpg: aka "Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org>"
> gpg: aka "Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com>"
> gpg: aka "Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org>"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----