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

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.

        manoj
-- 
"If all men were brothers, would you let one marry your sister?" Author
Unknown
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: