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

Re: GR proposal, Call for Seconds - term limit for the tech-ctte

On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:50:27AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> We discussed, and I thought there was consensus around, the idea that
> due to the recent ctte churn, the transitional measure was no longer
> needed.

You recall correctly, but a simple removal of the transitional measure
would have very different effects on the various proposals.  So what I
did instead is to try to uniform the *effects* of the various proposals,
so that the removal (or not) of transitional measures would result in
the same net result --- as much as permitted by the intrinsic
differences in the proposals, that is.

I've done that between draft #2 and draft #3 (as usual, based on my own
perception of consensus) and discussed the rationale behind my choices
when announcing the last draft [1]. It would have been useful to hear
about this back then.

[1]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2014/11/msg00274.html

But right now, I'm not sure to understand what your main concern is, and
I'd appreciate if you could elaborate a bit more. With the current
transitional measure, the proposal 2-S will de facto do nothing for a
full year. The first expiries will kick in only on January 1st, 2016.
That is the same that you would obtain with, say, proposal without any
transitional measure.

If you propose an amendment for 2-S ("my" proposal, the one that seems
to have received enough seconds now) to remove the transitional measure,
that will mean that the first expiries will happen on January 1st, 2017.
That's 2 years before seeing any effect whatsoever for the GR. Yes,
we've had some churn in the tech-ctte as of lately, but IMHO not that
much to justify such a delay.

Is that the goal you actually want to achieve?

Stefano Zacchiroli  . . . . . . .  zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Former Debian Project Leader  . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: