Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge difficulty of declassifying debian-private

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

I thought I would write a systematic summary of the effect of the
proposals:

 Proponent    Is declassification of       How might the rules
	      old posts permissible,       for -private be changed
	      and if so how ?              in the future ?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

 Gunnar       Unclear/disputed. [0]        Not clear.  Probably,
 (earlier,    (no explicit statement       listmaster can consult
  Nicolas)     in resolution proposal)	   and make new rules.

 Ian          Difficult/unlikely -         listmaster can consult
              2005 GR procedure.           and make new rules.[1]

 Iain         Forbidden.                   Difficult/unclear.[2]
              New GR would be needed       New GR probably needed.
              (or active consent
	      from each author).

 Don,         listmaster can consult       listmaster can consult
 (failed      and make new rules.[1,1a]    and make new rules.[1,1a]
  vote)

I have tried to represent the differing interpretations which seem to
exist within the project.  If anyone disagrees with my summary, please
let me know.  I will refine and repost it.  When the call for votes
comes out, I intend to post it to -devel and -project (with the
proponent names replaced with option letters or numbers).

[0] Different people have said (i) that this text permits listmaster
   to declassify past posts according to usual decisionmaking rules in
   Debian[1] or, on the other hand, that (ii) if this text were passed
   listmaster is not allowed to declassify without a further GR.

[1] The constitution itself says that delegates such as the
   listmasters ought to consult;
[1a] Don's proposal additionally explicitly requires any
   declassification to occur after a delay to enable opponents to
   overrule via GR.

[2] Iain's proposal speaks of "archives".  That might mean only things
   which are archives at the time of passing of the GR, but IMO the
   more natural reading is to include all archives even those which
   might come into existence in the future - in which case listmaster
   is prohibited from setting up a declassification system which
   applies prospectively.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.