It looks like the TC are going to be proposing some GRs within the next few months. Very likely there will be three:
- Constitutional change to fix the supermajority bug - Constitutional change to permit the TC to have private discussion - Position statement regarding when TC should overrule maintainers I'm emailing you to give you a heads-up and get your opinion about procedure. These are all independent issues and we think they should be discussed and voted on concurrently, but voted on separately. How should this be done ? As three concurrent but entirely separate GRs ? I don't know whether your GR processes can do a single GR proposal with multiple sub-ballots each with their own set of options, so that each sub-ballot can be separately accepted or rejected. Also, the constitution gives the proposer the power to accept amendments. If a GR was initiated by the TC, who has the power to accept amendments ? Is it just the TC as a whole by its own resolutions (which would be rather cumbersome) ? Or is it the TC member who proposed the TC resolution which started the GR ? I'm hoping that you'll say that it's just the TC as a whole but that the TC can delegate that power. If so, the TC's own resolution starting the GR can contain something like this: For the purposes of accepting or rejecting amendments to this GR proposal, according to Constitution A.1(2), we delegate to <name> the power to accept amendments, and to each of our other members the power to veto the acceptance of amendments (as if each TC member was a sponsor). The Committee reserves the right to overrule, by means of a TC resolution on whether to accept an amendment. What do you think ? thanks, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
