Re: Anton's amendment

[Yavor Doganov <yavor@doganov.org>]

At Wed, 01 Feb 2006 13:09:38 -0800,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> 
> 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.

Sorry about that, I thought I was doing a favour by shortening my reply.

> 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?

No, I think that Anton Zinoviev's amendment to the GR does *not*
require a change to the DFSG.  

But as it is clear that DDs interpret the DFSG differently, I agree
that a "clarification" to the DFSG #3 may be proposed at a later
stage.  This will require 3:1 majority, of course.

-- 
Yavor Doganov