Re: Proposed wording for the SC modification
On Mon, Nov 17 2008, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> > This will need wording to change the SC
>> Since the proponents have not yet formulated a new version for the
>> changes to the foundation documents, here it is.
> This is not part of my GR as proposed and seconded.
> If anybody wants to change the words of either the DFSG or the SC they
> will need to propose an amendmend.
> As proposed this clarifies my and other people's view of what our
> foundation documents mean. You are welcome to add a
> note/comment/explanation to the SC, but this doesn't modify it.
You are making a permanent change to the statement made in the
DFSG (all programs need source code); this is being passed with a 3:1
majority, so of course the foundation documnents will have to be
changed. The only way to supersede the foundation document, as defined
in the constitution, is to change it via a 3:1 vote. This is the only
way to reconcile the GR with the constitution, in my opinion.
"If all men were brothers, would you let one marry your sister?" Author
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C