Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes:
> I, too, would like to re-propose the General Resolution I proposed three
> years ago. (This is substantively the same, with only minor wording
> changes.)
>
> ======================================================================
> 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, withdraw, and supsersede 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.
>
> ======================================================================
> 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.
> ======================================================================
>
> I am seeking seconds for this amendment. In the interests of full
> disclosure I should point out that I do not expect the proposer of the
> resolution I am amending to accept this amendment. This amended version
> of the resolution does not create a class of nontechnical policy
> document or statement called a "foundational document".
>
> (If any readers have questions about the amendment process, I urge them
> to re-read section A.1. of the Debian Constitution[1].)
>
> [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
Seconded
Regards,
Bob
- --
_
|_) _ |_ Robert D. Hilliard <hilliard@debian.org>
|_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way <bob@bobhilliard.net>
Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D6559
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by: Debian GNU/Linux -> Emacs -> Gnus -> Mailcrypt
iD8DBQE/a580n+Nh6TkNZVkRAkMwAJ4wAXS8Yi29uaZLw8lJnEiSzZeC5wCgu/V1
lTcakY0fl4Srtk+OzjQbqBA=
=wrKq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: