Andreas Barth writes (Re: Bug#636783: proposed constitution fix for
super-majority within the tech ctte):
Good. In that case I think we should just call for votes, and vote it,
and do the other topics in different GRs?
This is a fine idea but if we are going to do several GRs we should
run
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Bug#636783: proposed constitution fix for
super-majority within the tech ctte):
* Explicitly being allowed to have private discussions on the subject
of who should maintain a particular package. The options should be:
- private discussions when we feel
There is one wrinkle we may need to sort out.
The resolution procedure for GRs contemplates amendments being
accepted by the proposer. Particularly for my advisory proposal, it
seems that discussion about wording might produce amendments we would
like to accept.
But we don't want to have a TC
* Ian Jackson (ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [120320 13:01]:
This would be in the form of a TC resolution along these lines:
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
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
I think I agree. Perhaps we should offer that as the only option for
change.
How about this:
In Constitution 6.3 (wdiff -i):
3. Public [-discussion and-] decision-making.
[-Discussion,-]
Draft resolutions and
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:39:54AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
* Possibly increasing the maximum size of the committee. I would be
happy with 12, given the busy nature of the existing members.
If there are people interested in helping drive things to resolution, that
would be
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#636783: proposed constitution fix for super-majority
within the tech ctte):
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
I would be willing to make time to attend a public IRC meeting for
this purpose.
I would as well. I believe we are all primarily in Europe
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [120319 05:10]:
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
Andreas Barth writes:
As I got no further comments from other people of the tech ctte, this
can only mean that everyone agrees with this version, or is not
interessted.
I think the
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [120319 05:10]:
I would be happy to go forward with the GR to fix the supermajority rule
by itself, since I think it's uncontroversial and could be easily passed.
Good. In that case I think we should just call for votes,
Andreas Barth writes (Bug#636783: proposed constitution fix for super-majority
within the tech ctte):
+ 2. An option A defeats the default option D provided that:
+ (a) V(A,D) is strictly greater than V(D,A); and
+ (b) if a supermajority of N:1
10 matches
Mail list logo
