On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 02:24:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > a) All general resolutions must start with an announcement to > debian-devel-announce and debian-devel, with foolow ups > redirected to -devel. No. resolutions won't be tracked on -devel. If I get cc'd, I'll end up getting the whole flmefest dumped in my inbox because many people don't bother to trip headers. That's also unacceptable. The propper place is -devel-announce and -vote with follow ups to -vote. If the person wants to cc -devel also that's up to them but that's also cross posting as far as *I* am concerned. With this setup, people who want to follow voting topics w/o subscribing to and wading through the -devel list can.
> b) The announcement should be generally labeled as being general > resolutions, including, but not limited to, a subject tag, like > so: > Subject: [GENERAL RESOLUTION] ... I thought [Proposal] was enough (to distinguish from [Amendment] but if you prefer GENREAL RES instead, I can live with that. It should be enough to state that this proposal is a GR in the body, though. Infact, you state a liberal approach (no limited to I'd rather limit it to [P...] and [A...] with GR mentioned in the body and be a little more strict about it. > c) The call for votes should be submitted to -devel and -vote, after > the discussion period is over and a final form of the resolution > is available, along with any amendments, etc, which have recieved > adequate number of seconds. > d) The call for votes should contain the full text of the proposed > resolution and amendments, along with the names of the proposer > and seconds. Are you drawing a distinction between the CFV and the ballot? The vote doesn't happen automaticly. The proposer or a sponsor has to Call for the Vote and then I pass out the ballets... > The following are just proposals > e) We may create a virtual package so that we can use the BTS to > track the progress and status of the all current resolutions. The > initial proposal, any amendments, and the final form and ballot > should all be CC'd to the bug report (the intervening discussions > need not be). I didn't like the Policy stuff going to the BTS, I object to GR stuff going there, too. > f) Mandate a pre prosal, or require that there have been a period of > discussion prior to calling for a general resolution. Include a > rationale in the initial proposal that details when the > discussions were held, and why we think a resolution is required That's what getting "enough" sponsors is supposed to do. If the required 5 come automaticly, then maybe we should raise the minimum or do away with it all together instead of adding another layer of preproposal. -- Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. ========================================================================= * http://benham.net/index.html <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>< * * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------* * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * =========================================================================
pgp6aNNNxumar.pgp
Description: PGP signature
