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

Re: GR proposal: give up on declassifying debian-private (Re: General Resolution: Declassifying debian-private results)

Ian Jackson dijo [Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:23:31PM +0100]:
> > > Do I need to re-make my proposal as an amendment to Gunnar's or are
> > > you happy to treat it as such ?
> > 
> > FWIW I think we will be better off if we have it as a distinct option
> > (as it is semantically quite different).
> Sorry, yes, that's what I mean.  But formally there is one GR with a
> number of different options, each of which is a technically an
> amendment.  (The process has this so that there is a defined person
> who decides when to call a vote - in this case, you.)
> But right now if my proposal gets enough seconds, technically there
> might be two separate GRs, which would be silly.

Oh? I have skipped the administrative part of this all; I expected the
Secretary to call for a vote when a proposal had enough seconds, and
add options to it as the thematically-grouped ones reached enough

Following the Constitution's text: We have reached 4.2.1, according to
4.2.7, for my original text; right now, the only other proposal
formally on the table (Ian Jackson's) has not yet reched K.

Anyway, I do clearly see value in having your proposal as part of the
ballot (as well as Iain's, if he pushes it on and makes it a formal
proposal. I will call for a vote... Say, by Friday. Meanwhile, we have
some time to get more sponsors for this option.

Now, how should I "mark" your proposal as a formal option for sharing
the ballot with mine?

FWIW, I'm signing this mail, so that the Secretary clearly reads my
intention :)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: