On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 02:09:49PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > The only thing which the SPI should care about with respect to the > authority held by the DPL and the Secretary is their authority with > respect to the requests made to the SPI. And these authorities is > somethign which can and should be very clearly enumerated.
I agree. Paragraph 5 of the final draft which the board approved today only referred to their authority insofar as it is relevant to SPI, not every aspect of their authority. Read literally, paragraph 4's final version unintentionally applied the relevance restriction only to notification about GRs, and not to disputes or changes regarding the DPL's authority, but given context and common sense, I'd expect that people will be reasonable in interpreting and applying that paragraph. If it actually becomes a problem where the Debian Secretary feels compelled to tell SPI about irrelevant changes in the DPL position, we can fix the wording to be precisely correct at that time. I, for one, think the imprecision will have little enough practical effect that it's not worth worrying about or spending time to correct unless we find that it ends up mattering. If you agree, let's end this thread. - Jimmy Kaplowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. - "SPI", not "the SPI". _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
