Re: GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 18, Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org) wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> We seem to have stalled on this proposal. There have been, if I
> recall correctly, three seconds to my proposal, and one request for a
> change, namely to explicitly list the foundation documents in the
> constitution, which also had one other supporter.
>
> This proposed amendment to my proposal would simplify things,
> as there is no external list of foundation documents to maintain, and
> it would also put a high bar to modifying the list of foundation
> documents (which is not in itself a bad thing: there have been a
> concern about an explosion of ``foundation class'' documents
> ossifying current mores and practice).
>
>
> I have no objections to this amendment; however, people who
> seconded my proposal would need to be polled.
>
> Would the amended proposal be more to the liking of people?
> Or would people prefer the original proposal? Given the new voting
> mechanism, we can have both on the ballot. However, at this point
> there are not enough seconds for either variant to actually have a
> GR.
I prefer the amended proposal, and second that.
> I am appending the proposal, and the amendment, to this mail
> message.
>
> manoj
>
> ======================================================================
> 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 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
> s.9.1.)
>
> ======================================================================
> 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.
> ======================================================================
>
> ######################################################################
> ######################################################################
> ######################################################################
>
> > + 5.2 Initially, the list of foundation Documents consists
> > + of this document, The Debian Constitution, as well as the
> > + documents known as the Debian 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.
> + 5.2 The list of foundation Documents consists
> + of this document, The Debian Constitution, as well as the
> + documents known as the Debian 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 only by changing this clause, which needs
> + according to 5.1 a 3:1 majority.
>
> Advantage: This makes the list in 5.2 the authoritative list, which
> makes it easier later to see which documents are in fact foundation
> Documents. (Or to speak in computer slang: normalization of data.)
>
>
> --
> Economists are still trying to figure out why the girls with the least
> principle draw the most interest.
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <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
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
- --
Neil Roeth
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQE/ak5y6j+skPrutKkRAjIUAKCz58hudOT551zB4AhzMF3nL7jO/ACgnS1F
Xu+IcHsLAWWzTpSR1xieATg=
=PZ6G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: