Andreas: GR amendment proposal below. Le lundi, 31 août 2015, 11.04:59 Axel Beckert a écrit : > I would have preferred if "off-by-one" would have been used instead of > "fencepost" as in the subject of the original GR proposal. That term > is later missing in the announcement by Kurt as well as on > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 > > "off-by-one" is very common, self-descriptive and well-known even > among non-native speakers. "fencepost" is not. (…) > > > or would you like to propose a GR amendment? > > As far as I understand this would mean proposing an alternative choice > for the voter. In that case, the damage is already done and cannot be > undone. This IMHO only makes sense if I'd propose different > semantics.
The GR proposer can accept formal wording changes directly on his
amendment proposal (§A.1.5).
I think the change would clarify the GR for more voters than only you,
so I'm hereby asking Andreas whether he'd accept a wording change on his
GR proposal as follows (%s/fencepost/off-by-one/g), under §A.1.5:
--- a/vote_002
+++ b/vote_002
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
Committee could overrule a Developer with a supermajority of 3:1.
Unfortunately, the definition of supermajorities in the SSD GR has a
[-fencepost-]{+off-by-one+} error. In the new text a supermajority
requirement is met only if the ratio of votes in favour to votes
against is strictly greater than the supermajority ratio.
@@ -78,9 +78,9 @@
votes (whether General Resolutions or votes in the Technical
Committee) in progress at the time the change is made.
The effect is to fix the [-fencepost-]{+off-by-one+} bug, and
arrange that failing asupermajority voids the whole decision (or
makes it advisory), rather than promoting another option. The
[-fencepost-]{+off-by-one+} bugfix will also have a (negligible)
effect on any General Resolutions requiring supermajorities. And
after this change the TC chair can choose a non-default option even
if it is tied with a default
Cheers,
OdyX
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
