Re: Overriding vs Amending vs Position statement

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

> Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> writes:
> > Are you saying the statement “this proposal conflicts with the
> > foundation documents” can be true for some people simultaneously
> > with being false for other people?
> 
> Of course it can be!  That would only not be true if we had unanimity
> over the meaning of the foundation documents, which we clearly do not,

So, in effect, you advocate the position that “the foundation documents”
refers to a different set of documents depending on who is being asked?

> or if we had a body in Debian with the power to declare the canonical
> meaning of the foundation documents for all developers, which similarly
> we do not.

To the extent that we need to take different action depending on whether
a proposal conflicts with the foundation documents, is it not true that
we need a body with the power to *make decisions* about the truth of
statements like “this proposal conflicts with the foundation documents”?

The only way I can see that power being unnecessary is if nothing hinges
on whether a proposal conflicts with foundation documents. If, on the
other hand, anything *does* hinge on that determination, someone needs
to *make* that determination in cases where actions depend on it.

-- 
 \                             “Holy tintinnabulation, Batman!” —Robin |
  `\                                                                   |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney