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

Re: [dissenting]: Proposal: Enhance requirements for General resolutions



Bill Allombert dijo [Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:53:02PM +0100]:
> This theory does not match the project history in any way. 
> vote.debian.org details all the GR which garnered sufficient
> level of support to be valid to be called for vote:
> 
> The first GR was passed in June 2003 and there were 804 developers.
> The last GR was passed in November 2008 and there were 1018 developers.
> 
> So the number of developers did not significantly increase as far as
> GR are concerned.
> (...)
> To set an example, are you willing to refrain to call for vote this GR until
> you get at least 30 seconds ?
> (...)
> I am afraid this GR will be inefficient to reach its objective (which
> I disapprove of):
> 
> 1) It does not limit the number of GR proposal which will be made, only
> the number that will be callable for vote.
> 
> 2) This will reduce the standard for seconding GR proposals.
> 
> 3) It can be worked around by a set of 25 developers that would just
> seconds any GR proposal made, even if they plan to vote against.

Humh... Maybe this could be solved by having two numbers for two
different things instead of only one.

Maybe a higher number of developers than the 5 needed today should be
pursued to bring a topic to GR. However, to push for each of the
topic's possible resolutions, 5 would be still enough.

Very often, many people with heavily dissenting points of view will
only agree on the need to hold a GR. So, there we have enough people
(although 30 still seems too high for me - Specially given that only a
portion of the active DDs is also active in the lists and
decision-taking processes). The possible options (amendments) to be
voted are alternative ways out of the situation, and could be
satisfied with probably the current five seconders. 

And FWIW, just not to forget the point: Several months ago, when this
thread was last mentioned, I expressed my opinion on that _seconding_
a ballot should not be taken as _supporting_ the ballot - It might
just be recognized as an important viewpoint to take into
consideration, even for a particular DD who is against it.

-- 
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973  F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF

Attachment: pgpjp1H0sq5ry.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: