Charles Plessy <ple...@debian.org> writes: > in light of the painful firmware GR this year, I think that the > following ideas can help to avoid such a situation to happen again. > > - Restrict the use of 3:1 supermajority to GRs proposing changes of > our fundation documents.
This restriction would not address the perceived problems with the gr_lenny_firmware ballot. Recall that “changes to the foundation documents” was the very justification for why the 3:1 supermajority requirements were applied as they were. What it seems is that some people (including you?) disagree with some others on *what* constitutes a change to foundation documents. That seems to be the point that needs better clarification. > - Ask the GR proposer to take part of the work load, for instance by > gathering and counting the PGP-signed secondings and writing the > vote.debian.org page. I like this idea for its “share the load” effect, but I can see a change in conflict of interest if the person who proposes the GR also gets to write up the formal vote document. -- \ “I installed a skylight in my apartment. The people who live | `\ above me are furious!” —Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
