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

Re: Alternative proposal: support for alternative init systems is desirable but not mandatory

Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> writes:

> During the TC discussions in January/February 2014, the TC had a small
> legitimacy crisis, that resulted in the GR override clause of the
> default init resolution. I hope that the result of this GR will be able
> to serve as input in future TC discussions on similar/related topics.

As one of the people who thought that clause was a good idea, I don't
think that it's only there due to a legitimacy crisis.  My opinion then,
which continues to be my position now, is that requiring a supermajority
to overrule the TC is a mistake.  The bar for a GR is already high enough,
and we, as a project, already tend to defer to existing decisions.  I
think that's enough protection against unnecessary reversals, and I think
a TC decision opposed by 60% of the project but still enforced is a very
unhealthy place to be.

The clause allowing an override by simple majority was a hack to disable
the constitution's super-majority requirement.  I continue to be in favor
of a constitutional amendment to remove the super-majority requirement for
TC overrides via GR in general, thus eliminating the need for such hacks.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: