First, superceding RFCs is relatively easy because they re clearly numbered, straightforward texts which are regularly released. Doing this wiht the DFSG or Social Contract or Constitution makes little sense;
We probably won't do things like having RFC 1, 2, 3, etc. as you mentioned, and then having the Social Contract be STD 1, etc. I was personally thinking of versioning, as you mention below:
Somewhat more clear, given the way things are structured, would be versioning (either by version number or date) any modifications, with later versions superceding earlier ones (but all good version tracking keeps older versions easily fetchable, right? *couch*).
I was thinking of something along the lines of (with a hypothetical Social Contract change):
On February 29, 2100, Debian's developers _voted to supersede_
the _previous Social Contract, version 1_ Debian Social Contract
Version 2 1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software and Almost Free
Documentation
..._voted to supersede_ would be a link to the vote, and _previous Social Contract, version 1_ would be a link to the previous social contract. Feburary 29, 2100 would, of course, be the date that we decide that documentation doesn't really need to be free (see the -legal archives...)[0]
The previous version would have a similar note:
On February 29, 2100, Debian's developers voted to _supersede
this version of the social contract._ The new document is
_Debian Social Contract, Version 2._ Debian Social Contract
Version 1 1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software
...
My personal favorite would require some (relatively minor) effort from someone (probably the Secretary); a document which has sidenotes or footnotes/references stating when sections have been elided, what the origional section was, the rationale for change, the date of confirmation (or end of vote?), etc. Though, really, this could always be reconstructed from a versioned arrangement.
This would work fine for minor changes; however, if done for large amendments the document would become cluttered and difficult to read. We generally don't do minor changes.
Certainly, the secretary could prepare a marked up version to show what changed from the previous version. Also, proposed changes would likely contain a similar thing as well as rationale, and would be at the vote link. The new version of the document could also include rationale.
[0] Please don't reply to this without considering long and hard the
date.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
