Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 06:31:50PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Obviously you have no problem with throwing out the social contract on a
> > whim.
On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 01:34:20PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Please explain to where the proposed GR mandates this.
Please explain what part of the constitution allows for a GR to
amend the social contract.
> I see an amendement of its language, but no blanket repeal of the document.
As near as I can tell, the constitution gives debian developers the
power to issue new documents. I don't see anything in it that grants
debian developers the right to amend the social contract.
Things to think about:
(*) The constitution does give developers the right to ammend the
constitution. But that's not what John has proposed.
(*) We could just ignore the constitution. Then we wouldn't even need
a GR.
(*) We could decide that the social contract is nothing more than
a document. We should probably rename it ("The Social Document" or,
more likely "Social Issues") in this case.
Mind you, I'm all for implementation decisions which decouple main
from non-free.
Also, I'd probably be interested in seeing something new that addresses
some of the hassles we've become aware of since the social contract
was written.
[Personally, I consider the social contract to be senior to the
constitution. If the constitution explicitly dealt with the issue of
modifying the social contract, I'd probably go along with that. However,
when I originally accepted the constitution, it was with the idea that
the constitution was a mechanism for implementing the social contract --
not the other way around. But that's probably just me, personally.]
--
Raul
Reply to: