Don Armstrong <d...@debian.org> writes:
> On Thu, 06 Feb 2014, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>> So let me expand on that a little. Image the following options
>> - A: something that doesn't overrule the ctte (1:1)
>> - B: something that does overrule the ctte (2:1)
>> - FD
> In this case, I don't know A could be anything but 2:1, baring riders
> from the CTTE. If A is technical, it needs the power of the CTTE under
> §4.1.4 which requires 2:1. [I suppose something could be written which
> would fall under the DPL's remit.]
> As I understand it, we'd like to make everything be 1:1, and the method
> we're trying is to write a proposal in such a way that it automatically
> enshrouds a non-technical statement by the project in the power of the
> CTTE.
> It may be that we can't actually do that, and should instead just have
> an agreement between CTTE members to enact a decision which followed a
> position statement GR under §4.1.5.
I think what we're trying to say looks something like this:
If the project holds a GR vote on the topic of the default init
system, the winning option of that vote replaces this text in its
entirety and becomes the decision of the Technical Committee. The
winning option of the GR vote for this purpose will be decided
following the normal rules for deciding the outcome of a General
Resolution, with the exception that the 2:1 majority normally required
to overule the Technical Committee will not be taken into account.
I think this works, although it does create the possibility of a rather
odd situation, and I'm not quite sure how it would work procedurally.
Suppose that the project votes on a GR with the following imaginary
options:
A. The default init system for jessie will be [whatever the TC picked]
B. The default init system for jessie will be a single /etc/rc script
and suppose that B beats A beats FD, but B does not beat FD by a 2:1
majority.
The result of that GR is A. However, the choice picked by the above
algorithm is B. So B becomes the TC decision, despite the fact that A is
the result of the GR, and A, despite winning, now constitutes a TC
override and fails to go into effect. Unless you think of A happening
"before" the TC decision changes, at which point the TC can no longer
override it?
It's weird.
One thing that would make it less weird is if the GR phrased whatever
option concurs with the TC as saying that the project upholds the TC
decision, rather than stating what that decision is. Then, in the
scenario given above, A and B become the same as soon as the TC decision
is changed by the vote, and everything stays consistent.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87txcc92gz....@windlord.stanford.edu
