Le Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 08:50:36AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
>
> Agreed: there's no point discussing which number of seconders you want
> to require now, we just need a ballot with several options.
>
> I would also like options:
> - to explicitely say that we want to stay with 5 (no further
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hi,
I have felt for some time that the low requirement for seconds on General
Resolutions is something that should be fixed. We are over 1000
Developers, if you can't find more than 5 people supporting your idea,
its most probably not worth it taking time of everyone.
thi
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > In general, that's correct. In particular, if you need 30 people just
> > to *start* the discussion period, that's going to kill many potential
> > options before they have any chance of building consensus and others
> > will be far too entrenched by the time public discu
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009, MJ Ray wrote:
> Ron wrote:
> > Do you really think it would have been difficult to obtain 2Q seconds
> > for a resolution to recall the previous vote, and postpone it until
> > some of the more obvious glitches had been better ironed out? [...]
>
> Yes, based on the summary
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 07:01:17PM +0100, Michael Goetze wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > to reduce GRs, having
> > another way for developers to ask a question that nearly always gets
> > answered might help.
>
> Such as, say, writing an email to debian-de...@ldo?
Eh, -devel is for technical issues pe
Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for
General Resolutions"):
> The goal of this GR is still unclear to me, and I would welcome a
> preamble that clearly explains what problem is being solved. For the
> moment I do not know if the problem is
This is a good
This one time, at band camp, MJ Ray said:
> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> Many DDs ignore -project and even most stuff on -vote
> unless/until it looks likely to get enough seconds, don't they?
You're the one making the assertion, I think the onus is on you to prove
it. The discussion so far on this
This one time, at band camp, Stephen Gran said:
> Basic math says that in the described two way vote, if an option wins
> by 1.5Q, and the vote needs 3Q to be quorate, the number of people who
> have voted for the option is 2.25Q, which is more than the proposal.
> I don't think this is an argument
On 11622 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
> The goal of this GR is still unclear to me, and I would welcome a preamble
> that
> clearly explains what problem is being solved.
The goal is to change the needed seconds for a GR.
> For the moment I do not know if the problem is the multiplication
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:20:29AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 11622 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> > The goal of this GR is still unclear to me, and I would welcome a preamble
> > that
> > clearly explains what problem is being solved.
>
> The goal is to change the needed seconds fo
10 matches
Mail list logo
