[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Summary: Proposal - Rescind GR 2004-003

>>>>>  OA == Osamu Aoki [2004-5-7]


OA> * Can Craig and people who seconded original proposal [2] to second
OA> this as the formal rationale for Craig's proposal [1]?

I think that Craig's proposal should be on the ballot, therefore I
signed it.

I more or less agree with some (actually not so many, by far not all) of
the rationales listed by Osamu.  However, I don't think I need to agree
with all of these, or even any, for that matter; in fact, I don't
exactly understand what our secretary would want seconders to state
about the rationales part.

Coming to the Osamu's proposed reformulation, I like Craig's original
wording much more than that.  In particular I don't like that «but
recognizing that changing the Social Contract today would have grave
consequences for the upcoming stable release, a fact which does not
serve our goals or the interests of our users» thing at all: I suggest
stripping it off completely.

However, as a merely pragmatic position of convenience, I will be happy
with Osamu's reformulation if Craig and all of the other seconders state
that they are fine with it.

(Given our voting system, there will be actually no problem to have both
Craig's and Osamu's proposals on the ballot, but I tend to think that
too much options might be somewhat confusing, therefore I'm willing to
be pragmatic here.)

Salve, | GNU PG (GPG) Key ID: 9396865D
Davide | <http://www.linux.it/~salve/>

Attachment: pgp1hFXOQJFXV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: