Re: Anton's amendment
Yavor Doganov <yavor@doganov.org> writes:
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 12:46:19 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
>> Which means that you are perhaps arguing that we should make the change to
>> the DFSG which the amendment in question calls for.
>
> I agree with this (e.g. that the Invariant sections are
> DFSG-compliant):
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/01/msg00240.html
>
> Since you and the Secretary (probably others as well) are interpeting
> the DFSG in a different way, perhaps it is a good idea to clarify that
> particular sentence, but it is not an obstacle for the current GR.
I cannot fathom what you are saying, because you have so carefully
excised all the relevant context from the sentence of mine which you
quote.
But it sound sas if you are agreeing that the amendment is a change to
the DFSG, and so it is clear that it requires a 3:1 majority then.
Right?
Reply to: