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

Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 02:22:32 -0700, Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> said: 

> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> I can't see anywhere in the resolution it claims to invoke,
>> so afaics that doesn't apply.

> Since the resolution itself is about putting a decision on hold, 4.2
> seems to apply; the "resolution must say so" verbiage seems to be
> there to avoid putting a decision on hold by an amended resolution
> seconded by 2K developers which affirms a decision. [Although, the
> alternative supposition is tenable, even if it differs from my
> initial reading. Clarification by the proposer would resolve this
> issue.]

        Also, from the resolution itself:
] I disagree with the Policy delegation decision of our DPL [1] and
] therefore propose a resolution as defined in section 4.2.2 of the Debian
] constitution to delay the decision of the Debian Project Leader keeping
] the Package Policy Committee as defined[2] in place

        So it explicitly mentions 4.2.2, which means the resolution is
 about delaying decisions, not about affirming them; if the proposer
 and sponsors do not think that they wanted the hold to apply, they
 can now voice their opinions, and there would be no harm, no foul.

Let the people think they govern and they will be governed. William
Penn, founder of Pennsylvania
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: