On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 07:07:03PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:12:45AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:42:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > Hello developers, > > > > > > I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution > > > entitled "Enhance requirements for General resolutions". > > > > > > PROPOSAL START > > > ======================================================================== > > > General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian > > > Project, which have served us well since the first GR vote in 2003, > > > with 804 developers, nearly has much as today slightly over 1000 > > > developers. > > > > > > Therefore the Debian project reaffirms its attachement to the constitution > > > and the current General Resolutions process. > > > ======================================================================== > > > PROPOSAL END > > > > I am rescinding this amendment. Please second Lucas amendment instead, > > which has a cleaner wording. > > Robert, > > You're were the only one seconding that proposal, and now > the proposer of this amendment. You might want to withdraw > too and second Lucas's proposal instead. Thanks Kurt. I've seconded Lucas' amendment in a separate mail, and I'm hereby rescinding my second to Bill's amendment. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
Description: Digital signature