Ian Jackson <i...@davenant.greenend.org.uk> writes: > C. Rewrite the foundation documents so that they are clearly > comprehensible (rather than vague) and establish an independent > legally-minded body to make these decisions. > > D. Establish (or empower) some kind of interpretation committee, > which would have to be elected.
I very much agree with you about the foundation document issue. I especially would not want either of these alternatives to become the reality. In my opinion Debian is very averse to decisions by committees, and uses those only as a last resort for a very small subset of potential problems (ie. the TC). All other decisions are made either by individual developers or by the developer body as a whole (the GR process). Having a committee to rule on such potentially controversial issues as the interpretation of the DFSG and the SC would lead to massive flamewars and GRs after GRs to overrule said committee. I think we should take a good hard look at this issue, but preferably only after Lenny is released, so the people working hard to achieve that goal won't be distracted by another important issue. -- * Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) * * PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer * -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
