Re: Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest

2016-07-17 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Seconded. On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment > to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the > following amendment: > > === BEGIN GR TEXT === > > Title: Declassifying part

Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest

2016-07-17 Thread Don Armstrong
In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the following amendment: === BEGIN GR TEXT === Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassific

Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge that the debian-private list will remain private

2016-07-17 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 10:04:00PM +0200, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote: > * Kurt Roeckx [2016-07-16 20:52:03 +0200]: > > This is at least very confusing. The title says "will remain > > private", but none of the text says anything about it being > > private > > I agree that the current title is misl

Re: Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest

2016-07-17 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 04:08:23PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Sat, 16 Jul 2016, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote: > > I'm very close to seconding it. However, I wonder why, in the second phrase, > > you're restricting the process of objecting to declassification to a GR. > > The text doesn't restric