On 9/18/07, Nicholas Solter <Nicholas.Solter at sun.com> wrote: > Glynn, > > I agree that this seems awfully specific to be enshrined in the > constitution. Any hope of changing it? Was does it take to ratify a > constitutional amendment?
I don't know if it is worth the effort to change the constitution, when everyone seems happy with the status quo. (I think) -Brian > Thanks, > Nick > > Glynn Foster wrote: > > Hey, > > > > Nicholas Solter wrote: > >> Hi Glynn, > >> > >> Thanks for working on this much-needed document. I sent you a few > >> comments a while back that I'm not sure I see reflected here. See > >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-July/002108.html > >> > >> My general point is that the constitution seems to require consensus > >> voting for project instantiation and core contributor grants, while your > >> wording implies that community groups have more leeway in that area. For > >> example, you refer to "suggested" voting procedures, while my reading of > >> the constitution is that they are required. > > > > Having read through the constitution, looks like you are right. I'll > > try and > > rewrite the effected sections (though I think this somewhat contrary to the > > spirit of wanting the community groups to govern themselves). > > > > "Actions requiring a vote shall have a voting period of no less than > > seventy-two > > (72) hours." - Hooray for stop energy! ;) > > > > > > Glynn > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ogb-discuss mailing list > > ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss > > -- > Nicholas Solter, Solaris Cluster Development > http://blogs.sun.com/nsolter > _______________________________________________ > ogb-discuss mailing list > ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
