Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 06:10:46PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> As I count, this resolution to delay the decition of the DPL
> of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation has
> received 2K sponsors, which means that § 220.127.116.11 of the constitution
> to be called into action.
> | 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
> | 4.1. Powers
> | 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
> | 4.2. Procedure
> | 2. Delaying a decision by the Project Leader or their Delegate:
> | 1. If the Project Leader or their Delegate, or the Technical
> | Committee, has made a decision, then Developers can override
> | them by passing a resolution to do so; see s4.1(3).
> | 2. If such a resolution is sponsored by at least 2K Developers,
> | or if it is proposed by the Technical Committee, the
> | resolution puts the decision immediately on hold (provided
> | that resolution itself says so).
> | 4. If the decision is put on hold, an immediate vote is held to
> | determine whether the decision will stand until the full vote
> | on the decision is made or whether the implementation of the
> | original decision will be delayed until then. There is no
> | quorum for this immediate procedural vote.
> So, an immediate procedural vote has to be held to determine
> whether the decision will stand until the full vote, on the decision
> is made or whether the implementation of the original decision
> (i.e. withdrawl of delegation from the policy delegates) will be
> delayed until then.
> I am proposing the following draft ballot for this immediate
> vote, while I go about setting up the voting infrastructure. The
> vote page containing the details of this general resolution is not
> yet up, but as soon as it is it would be found at:
You are overpassing your rights as secretary, it is not for you as secretary
to call for a vote, or take any such actions, but it is only the proposer and
the seconders who can do such.
This action of yours right now, casts more light to your abysmal behaviour on
the non-free firmware vote, where you first let the issue wait until you where
able to propose a proposal of your liking, and then hurried in to get the vote
down, thus rejecting other proposals which where better and more in line of
what debian needed, and which you didn't want.
In light of this and your actions here, i strongly propose that on issues you
have a strong interest or opinion, that someone else than you is in charge of
doing the day-to-day work of the secretary, maybe the DPL or TC would be
adequate on this here, or maybe some kind of assistant secretary either
permanent or delegated for the occasion.
Anthony, can you comment on this ?