Re: GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Grrr, I seconded the wrong one before...
I hearby second the following proposal.
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi folks,
> Here is a spell checked version, and also one that removes the
> modify clause for the foundation documents. So now we may issue,
> withdraw, and supersede these documents, but not modify them in
> 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, supersede 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 Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as
> + critical to the Project's mission and purposes.
> + 5.2 The Foundation Documents are the works entitled "Debian
> + Social Contract" and "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
> + 5.3 A Foundation Document requires a 3:1 super-majority for its
> + supercession. New Foundation Documents are issued and
> + existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation
> + Documents in this constitution.
> 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 to be quite
> ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two
> wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the
> language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical
> documents. Additionally, this also provides for the core documents of
> the project the same protection against hasty changes that the
> constitution itself enjoys.
> Seems to me like most people have had a chance to comment on
> this proposal, and the current version ought to have addressed most
> of the issues raised. If that is the case, I would like to have this
> version be the one sponsored by people, and settle on this as the
> version that goes on the ballot.
> The privilege of absurdity; to which no living creature is subject but
> man only. -- Thomas Hobbs
> 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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----