Re: Amendment to GR Option 1: Hide Identities of Developers Casting a Particular Vote
Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> writes:
> I've been reading our new constitution about the discussion period. What
> I find is this in A.1.1:
> The discussion period starts when a draft resolution is proposed and
> sponsored. The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks. The maximum
> discussion period is 3 weeks.
> And in A.1.4:
> The addition of a ballot option or the change via an amendment of a
> ballot option changes the end of the discussion period to be one
> week from when that action was done [...]
> As I see it, there is only a minimum and a maximum, but not some
> default. After it's over, the secretary just call for vote. My
> interpretation is that as long as the minimum and maximum is not the
> same, the secretary can declare that the period is over after the
> minimum is over, but can also wait until the maximum is over before
> declaring it's over.
> So I can actually already say when the voting period is going to be,
> and am going for Saturday 2022-03-19 to Friday 2022-04-01, which will
> then directly be followed by the DPL vote.
Interesting. That was certainly not my intent when I wrote it (which
doesn't mean that it's necessarily wrong). The intent was to explicitly
set the end of the discussion period to match the minimum discussion
period at the start of the process, and then have the end of the
discussion period vary according to A.1.4 up to the maximum. I agree that
I seem to have left out a sentence explicitly saying that, though. (I
think there may have been one in an earlier draft that was lost in
subsequent editing.)
Regardless of whether that was my intent, at first glance I don't mind
your interpretation. It wasn't what I had intended, but it seems like a
fairly reasonable system.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: