Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 04:33:51AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? I hope so :-) Jochen -- http://seehuhn.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
Hi,
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote:
I second the above amendment.
Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds?
Probably, but we can't proceed until BR3 either has enough seconds, or it's
reasonably clear that it won't get them.
--
Matthias Urlichs|{M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.debian.net
- -
:upthread: adv. Earlier in the discussion (see {thread}), i.e., `above'.
As Joe pointed out upthread, ... See also {followup}.
pgp0.pgp
Description: signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 04:33:51 -0400, Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? Uhh, I have lost track. I need to go into the archive ans see who has seconded what, unless someone beats me to it. manoj -- The ACLU has stood foursquare against the recurring tides of hysteria that from time to time threaten freedoms everyhere... Indeed, it is difficult to appreciate how far our freedoms might have eroded had it not been for the Union's valiant representation in the courts of the constitutional rights of people of all persuasions, no matter how unpopular or even despised by the majority they were at the time. former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 12:06, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Uhh, I have lost track. I need to go into the archive ans see who has seconded what, unless someone beats me to it. I based this upon your message here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00036.html Branden's alternate Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] John H. Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Hilliard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] We are almost there with this proposal too, all we need is one DD to sign on to this. My key is not in the Debian keyring, nor does it have a trust path to it, so I have not verified the signatures. Yeah, I need to fix that. Nor have I even verified there are DD's by these names. However, here are archive URLs to the messages, to hopefully make the Secretary's life easier: * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00025.html * Bob Hilliard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00027.html * Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00029.html * Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00031.html * John H. Robinson, IV [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00033.html * Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00051.html * Jochen Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200309/msg00058.html I see Branden and 6 seconds. So it looks like we might of had enough seconds a while ago, if we only needed 5. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 04:33:51AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? I hope so :-) Jochen -- http://seehuhn.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
Hi,
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote:
I second the above amendment.
Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds?
Probably, but we can't proceed until BR3 either has enough seconds, or it's
reasonably clear that it won't get them.
--
Matthias Urlichs|{M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.debian.net
- -
:upthread: adv. Earlier in the discussion (see {thread}), i.e., `above'.
As Joe pointed out upthread, ... See also {followup}.
pgpSjBdLGJomG.pgp
Description: signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 04:33:51 -0400, Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 04:55, Jochen Voss wrote: I second the above amendment. Doesn't this mean the BR amendment now has enough seconds? Uhh, I have lost track. I need to go into the archive ans see who has seconded what, unless someone beats me to it. manoj -- The ACLU has stood foursquare against the recurring tides of hysteria that from time to time threaten freedoms everyhere... Indeed, it is difficult to appreciate how far our freedoms might have eroded had it not been for the Union's valiant representation in the courts of the constitutional rights of people of all persuasions, no matter how unpopular or even despised by the majority they were at the time. former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
I second Branden Robinson's amendment of Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:24:52PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: I, too, would like to re-propose the General Resolution I proposed three years ago. (This is substantively the same, with only minor wording changes.) == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == I second the above amendment. Jochen -- http://seehuhn.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
I second Branden Robinson's amendment of Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgpufE2Ii0zmt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:24:52PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == Seconded. Richard Braakman signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:24:52PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: I, too, would like to re-propose the General Resolution I proposed three years ago. (This is substantively the same, with only minor wording changes.) == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == I am seeking seconds for this amendment. In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that I do not expect the proposer of the resolution I am amending to accept this amendment. This amended version of the resolution does not create a class of nontechnical policy document or statement called a foundational document. Seconded. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
i hereby second the proposal below. -john Branden Robinson wrote: == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
i hereby second the proposal below. -john Branden Robinson wrote: == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == pgpDaIdJPyEs6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I, too, would like to re-propose the General Resolution I proposed three years ago. (This is substantively the same, with only minor wording changes.) == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == I am seeking seconds for this amendment. In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that I do not expect the proposer of the resolution I am amending to accept this amendment. This amended version of the resolution does not create a class of nontechnical policy document or statement called a foundational document. (If any readers have questions about the amendment process, I urge them to re-read section A.1. of the Debian Constitution[1].) [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution Seconded Regards, Bob - -- _ |_) _ |_Robert D. Hilliard[EMAIL PROTECTED] |_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D6559 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by: Debian GNU/Linux - Emacs - Gnus - Mailcrypt iD8DBQE/a580n+Nh6TkNZVkRAkMwAJ4wAXS8Yi29uaZLw8lJnEiSzZeC5wCgu/V1 lTcakY0fl4Srtk+OzjQbqBA= =wrKq -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [AMENDMENT BR1] GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I, too, would like to re-propose the General Resolution I proposed three years ago. (This is substantively the same, with only minor wording changes.) == 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority. -5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian - software must meet. - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. +5. Issue, withdraw, and supsersede nontechnical policy documents + and statements. These include documents describing the goals of + the project, its relationship with other free software entities, + and nontechnical policies such as the free software licence + terms that Debian software must meet. + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. == Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical documents. == I am seeking seconds for this amendment. In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that I do not expect the proposer of the resolution I am amending to accept this amendment. This amended version of the resolution does not create a class of nontechnical policy document or statement called a foundational document. (If any readers have questions about the amendment process, I urge them to re-read section A.1. of the Debian Constitution[1].) [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution Seconded Regards, Bob - -- _ |_) _ |_Robert D. Hilliard[EMAIL PROTECTED] |_) (_) |_) 1294 S.W. Seagull Way [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palm City, FL 34990 USA GPG Key ID: 390D6559 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by: Debian GNU/Linux - Emacs - Gnus - Mailcrypt iD8DBQE/a580n+Nh6TkNZVkRAkMwAJ4wAXS8Yi29uaZLw8lJnEiSzZeC5wCgu/V1 lTcakY0fl4Srtk+OzjQbqBA= =wrKq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
