Re: GR proposal: the AGPL does not meet the DFSG
MJ Ray wrote:
> Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> MJ Ray <email@example.com> writes:
>>> I hope that others will support this debian and co-op view.
>> I continue to object to this GR as currently worded because it is a
>> stealth delegate override that doesn't clearly state its implications and
>> effects. I encourage all DDs to not second it until it's been fixed, even
>> if you agree with the substance.
> Did the delegates decide this particular matter or was Bug #495721
> merely a summary of current practice? The statement there seemed
> incomplete in significant ways.
Yes, they did.
> Also, I think we should let the secretary to decide if a GR proposal
> modifies some foundation document, overrides a delegate decision, or
> requires amendment to be valid, rather than withholding seconds. I'm
> not that great at bureaucracy, so I think it's better that only the
> secretary decides the rules, rather than having every DD try to use
> the rule book as a weapon.
I think it's wrong to leave the decision on whether a GR proposal
modifies a foundation document to the secretary. I do think it's a good
idea to request withholding seconds if anything is unclear.