On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 06:41:05PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl> wrote: > > The ballot is now quite full, once it is time for seconds (not yet, let's > > first discuss), maybe some options will fail to get five seconds, so they are > > dropped. If all get enough seconds, well, this is what the voting system is > > designed to handle: a very broad spectrum of opinions, and still a good method > > to determine the best option for everyone. > Given that we have two GR proposal out, with seconds, it's perhaps not > too early to second, or rather propose, some parts. > However, I think we should not make this decision in a hurry. From a > technical point of view, it's about whether sarge will be released > within a couple of weeks, or a many months, so delaying the vote for a > couple of days is not a problem at all. On the other hand, this > discussion is about our basic principles, we should really take the time > we need. The period fixed by the constitution for the minimum discussion period is two weeks. The voting period set forth by the project secretary for this vote (I can't find a specification for this in the constitution, so I assume he has discretionary powers here) is also two weeks. If we really think we want to release sarge some time in June, four weeks is a rather large chunk of the remaining time to be left with doubts about the release, and that's even assuming there are *no* other amendments up for consideration that reset the discussion period (which I don't believe will be the case). It's definitely not too early, IMHO, to try to get the discussion moving and get everyone's amendments out on the table. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature