On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 04:03:15AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > ====================================================================== > 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election > > 4.1. Powers > > Together, the Developers may: > 1. Appoint or recall the Project Leader. > 2. Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. > 3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate. > 4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they > agree with a 2:1 majority. > - 5. Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements. > - These include documents describing the goals of the project, its > - relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical > - policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian > - software must meet. > - They may also include position statements about issues of the day. > + 5. Issue, supersede and withdraw nontechnical policy documents and > + statements. > + These include documents describing the goals of the project, its > + relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical > + policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian > + software must meet. > + They may also include position statements about issues of the day. > + 5.1 A Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as > + critical to the Project's mission and purposes. > + 5.2 The Foundation Document is the work entitled "Debian > + Social Contract". > + 5.3 A Foundation Document requires a 3:1 super-majority for its > + supersession. New Foundation Documents are issued and > + existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation > + Documents in this constitution. > 6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about > property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See > s.9.1.) > ====================================================================== > It occurs to me that there are some people who may wish to afford the > Debian Social Contract the opportunity of a 25% minority veto, but not > wish to extend this to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. > ======================================================================
Editorial note: If you're not the "me" that is speaking here then you should clarify that or rephrase. IIRC you're quoting Branden. I also think the rationale is at odds with the proposal, because the work entitled "Debian Social Contract" includes the DFSG. (Its title seems to vary a bit; doc-debian calls it "Debian GNU/Linux Social Contract". Was that the original title?) This inclusion isn't accidental; point 1 specifically says "As there are many definitions of free software, we include the guidelines we use to determine if software is "free" below." Richard Braakman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
