Re: call for seconds: on firmware
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 02:21:47PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> The constitution does not give release teams the powers to
> override the foundation documents, so the release team can not ignore
> SC violations.
> I can make a formal interpretation of the constitution, if you
> wish.
3. Individual Developers
3.1. Powers
An individual Developer may
1. make any technical or nontechnical decision with regard to their own
work;
The Secretary is not the Release Team's keeper.
And the DFSG is not a "decision properly made under [the rules of the
constitution]" because the DFSG predates the constitution and has never been
amended or re-confirmed by General Resolution. (2004/vote_003 only amended
the text of the Social Contract, not the DFSG.) So there's no way that the
constitution gives you special authority in disputes over interpretation of
the DFSG, either.
(Even if it had been ratified by GR, I find the claim that the Secretary's
powers include deciding whether a developer is "working against" a
constitutional decision to be dubious at best.)
> > Even if some people think that set of choices is nonsensical, my
> > understanding of the current situation is that the release team has
> > ruled, as DPL delegates, that the current situation does not violate
> > the SC sufficiently to warrant removing the relevant packages from
> I do not think that the constitution allows for
> "sufficiently". You can't supersede a foundation document "in a minor
> way" without a super majority vote.
"supersede" means "replace with a newer revision". The Release Team hasn't
proposed doing anything of the sort.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Reply to: