Re: Draft: Proposal Alternative: Traning data is not source code

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> writes:


    Stefano> Either way, having a single option would certainly be
    Stefano> better than having two, in terms of reaching the needed
    Stefano> quorum for an alternative option to be on the
    Stefano> ballot. (Assuming you two are fine with "merging" the
    Stefano> proposals, of course.)

I don't see this at all.
I don't see anyone stepping forward and saying they would sponsor a
merged proposal but not one of the existing proposals.
I've sponsored Aigars's proposal.  I don't think he likes my option
enough to sponsor it.
I would encourage you to sponsor his proposal if you have not done so.

I think our voting system deals well with ballot options, so I've never
bought into the desire to minimize ballot options.
I'm absolutely happy to work with Aigars to minimize differences between
our proposals and to highlight those differences, not out of a desire to
get a single merged proposal, but out of a desire to be clear what we
are voting for.