On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 06:05:45PM +0000, Neil McGovern wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 05:53:48PM +0000, Neil McGovern wrote: > > Seconded, but I'd also like a couple of amendments which I'll add in > > another mail. > > > > And here's those amendments. > […] > Amendment B - Updates to the CoC should be via developers as a whole > Justification - I believe that this document should have the strength of > being a whole project statement. Being able to be updated by a single > person doesn't feel comfortable with me. > […] While I have sympathy with this argument, requiring a full GR to change the content of the CoC feels a little bit heavyweight to me. How about something like this? --- Replace 3. in the original GR proposal with: 3. Updates to this code of conduct can be made by the unanimous consent of at least K* developers or, failing that, if at least K* developers in favour outweigh those developers opposed with a 3:1 majority. Amendments shall be proposed for discussion on a publicly-readable mailing list designated by the Project Secretary. There is a combined minimum discussion and seconding period of two weeks folowing the proposal of an amendment, after which the amendment is withdrawn if it has not received sufficient support. Updates may also be made by the Debian Developers as a whole using the standard General Resolution procedure. --- * I would be open to changing this. Thanks, -- Iain Lane [ iain@orangesquash.org.uk ] Debian Developer [ laney@debian.org ] Ubuntu Developer [ laney@ubuntu.com ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature