On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:24:11PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: [snip] > ====================================================================== > 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, modify 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 special clause applies to the documents labelled as > + "Foundation Documents". These documents are those > + that are deemed to be critical to the core of the project, > + they tend to define what the project is, and lay the > + foundations of its structure. The developers may > + modify a foundation document provided they agree with a 3:1 > + majority. > > + 5.2 Initially, the list of foundation Documents consists > + of this document, The Debian Constitution, as well as the > + documents known as the Debian Social Contract and the > + Debian Free Software Guidelines. The list of the documents > + that are deemed to be "Foundation Documents" may be changed > + by the developers provided they agree with a 3:1 majority. > 6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about > property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See > s.9.1.) > > ====================================================================== > Rationale: The clause being modified has been seen to be quite > ambiguous. Since the original wording appeared to be amenable to two > wildly different interpretations, this change adds clarifying the > language in the constitution about _changing_ non technical > documents. Additionally, this also provides for the core documents of > the project the same protection against hasty changes that the > constitution itself enjoys. > ======================================================================
[snip]
> I am now formally looking for seconds for this proposal.
Seconded.
Simon
pgps3FzIhFTN0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
