From: Ian Jackson Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:04:16 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Merge GR drafts as our subdirectory X-Git-Url: https://git.donarmstrong.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0740705af31ecdc04318608770f53892451b1605;p=debian-ctte.git Merge GR drafts as our subdirectory --- 0740705af31ecdc04318608770f53892451b1605 diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/.gitignore index 0000000,0000000..b25c15b new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/.gitignore @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,1 @@@ ++*~ diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/amend-propose index 0000000,0000000..5682097 new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/amend-propose @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,26 @@@ ++ ++2. It is not practical for the TC to vote to accept/reject individual ++ amendments to the GR proposal. The TC would wish to delegate its ++ power to accept amendments, to avoid needing the collection of ++ sponsors for uncontroversial changes. However the Secretary has ++ advised that this is not constitutionally acceptable. ++ ++ Therefore, to achieve roughly the same effect, the TC makes the ++ following promise. If any TC member gives notice that the TC ++ accepts an amendment, then at least one of the following will ++ happen: ++ ++ (a) the TC will use its own power under A.1(1) to arrange that ++ the amendment appears on the GR ballot as an option; ++ ++ (b) the TC will use its power under A.1(1) to propose and ++ its power under A.1(2) to accept the amendment, so that ++ the amendment is incorporated in the version voted on; or ++ ++ (c) A member of the TC will publicly notify the amendment's ++ proposer that the amendment will not be accepted after all. ++ In this case TC will wait at least 7 more days before calling ++ for a vote, to give time for the amendment's proposer to ++ collect sponsors. ++ ++===== TC RESOLUTION ENDS ===== diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/constitution.html index 0000000,0000000..a87c74c new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/constitution.html @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,924 @@@ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ Debian Constitution ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
++

Debian Constitution

++

Constitution for the Debian Project (v1.4)

++

Version 1.4 ratified on October 7th, 2007. Supersedes ++Version 1.3 ratified on September 24th, ++2006, ++Version 1.2 ratified on October 29th, ++2003 and ++Version 1.1 ratified on June 21st, ++2003, which itself supersedes Version 1.0 ++ratified on December 2nd, 1998.

++ ++

1. Introduction

++

The Debian Project is an association of individuals who have ++made common cause to create a free operating system.

++

This document describes the organisational structure for formal ++decision-making in the Project. It does not describe the goals of the ++Project or how it achieves them, or contain any policies except those ++directly related to the decision-making process.

++

2. Decision-making bodies and individuals

++

Each decision in the Project is made by one or more of the ++following:

++
    ++
  1. The Developers, by way of General Resolution or an election;
  2. ++
  3. The Project Leader;
  4. ++
  5. The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;
  6. ++
  7. The individual Developer working on a particular task;
  8. ++
  9. Delegates appointed by the Project Leader for specific ++ tasks;
  10. ++
  11. The Project Secretary.
  12. ++
++

Most of the remainder of this document will outline the powers of ++these bodies, their composition and appointment, and the procedure for ++their decision-making. The powers of a person or body may be subject to ++review and/or limitation by others; in this case the reviewing body or ++person's entry will state this. In the list above, a person or ++body is usually listed before any people or bodies whose decisions they ++can overrule or who they (help) appoint - but not everyone listed ++earlier can overrule everyone listed later.

++

2.1. General rules

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Nothing in this constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to ++ do work for the Project. A person who does not want to do a task ++ which has been delegated or assigned to them does not need to do ++ it. However, they must not actively work against these rules and ++ decisions properly made under them.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    A person may hold several posts, except that the Project Leader, ++ Project Secretary and the Chairman of the Technical Committee must ++ be distinct, and that the Leader cannot appoint themselves as their ++ own Delegate.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    A person may leave the Project or resign from a particular post ++ they hold, at any time, by stating so publicly.

    ++
  6. ++
++

3. Individual Developers

++

3.1. Powers

++

An individual Developer may

++
    ++
  1. make any technical or nontechnical decision with regard to their ++ own work;
  2. ++
  3. propose or sponsor draft General Resolutions;
  4. ++
  5. propose themselves as a Project Leader candidate in ++ elections;
  6. ++
  7. vote on General Resolutions and in Leadership elections.
  8. ++
++

3.2. Composition and appointment

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Developers are volunteers who agree to further the aims of the ++ Project insofar as they participate in it, and who maintain ++ package(s) for the Project or do other work which the Project ++ Leader's Delegate(s) consider worthwhile.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    The Project Leader's Delegate(s) may choose not to admit new ++ Developers, or expel existing Developers. If the Developers ++ feel that the Delegates are abusing their authority they can of ++ course override the decision by way of General Resolution - see ++ §4.1(3), §4.2.

    ++
  4. ++
++

3.3. Procedure

++

Developers may make these decisions as they see fit.

++

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. ++
  3. ++

    Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 ++ majority.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the Project ++ Leader or a Delegate.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the Technical ++ Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    Issue, supersede 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.

    ++
      ++
    1. A Foundation Document is a document or statement regarded as ++ critical to the Project's mission and purposes.
    2. ++
    3. The Foundation Documents are the works entitled Debian ++ Social Contract and Debian Free Software Guidelines.
    4. ++
    5. A Foundation Document requires a 3:1 majority for its ++ supersession. New Foundation Documents are issued and ++ existing ones withdrawn by amending the list of Foundation ++ Documents in this constitution.
    6. ++
    ++
  10. ++
  11. ++

    Make decisions about property held in trust for purposes ++ related to Debian. (See §9.).

    ++
  12. ++
  13. ++

    In case of a disagreement between the project leader and ++ the incumbent secretary, appoint a new secretary.

    ++
  14. ++
++

4.2. Procedure

++
    ++
  1. ++

    The Developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below. ++ A resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any ++ Developer and sponsored by at least K other Developers, or if ++ proposed by the Project Leader or the Technical Committee.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Delaying a decision by the Project Leader or their Delegate:

    ++
      ++
    1. If the Project Leader or their Delegate, or the Technical ++ Committee, has made a decision, then Developers can override them ++ by passing a resolution to do so; see §4.1(3).
    2. ++
    3. If such a resolution is sponsored by at least 2K Developers, ++ or if it is proposed by the Technical Committee, the resolution ++ puts the decision immediately on hold (provided that resolution ++ itself says so).
    4. ++
    5. If the original decision was to change a discussion period or ++ a voting period, or the resolution is to override the Technical ++ Committee, then only K Developers need to sponsor the resolution ++ to be able to put the decision immediately on hold.
    6. ++
    7. If the decision is put on hold, an immediate vote is held to ++ determine whether the decision will stand until the full vote on ++ the decision is made or whether the implementation of the ++ original decision will be delayed until then. There is no ++ quorum for this immediate procedural vote.
    8. ++
    9. If the Project Leader (or the Delegate) withdraws the ++ original decision, the vote becomes moot, and is no longer ++ conducted.
    10. ++
    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    ++ Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and ++ results are not revealed during the voting period; after the ++ vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast. The voting ++ period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the ++ Project Leader. ++

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by ++ up to 1 week by the Project Leader. The Project Leader has a ++ casting vote. There is a quorum of 3Q.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    Proposals, sponsors, amendments, calls for votes and other ++ formal actions are made by announcement on a publicly-readable ++ electronic mailing list designated by the Project Leader's ++ Delegate(s); any Developer may post there.

    ++
  10. ++
  11. ++

    Votes are cast by email in a manner suitable to the Secretary. ++ The Secretary determines for each poll whether voters can change ++ their votes.

    ++
  12. ++
  13. ++

    Q is half of the square root of the number of current ++ Developers. K is Q or 5, whichever is the smaller. Q and K need not ++ be integers and are not rounded.

    ++
  14. ++
++

5. Project Leader

++

5.1. Powers

++

The Project Leader may:

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Appoint Delegates or delegate decisions to the Technical ++ Committee.

    ++

    The Leader may define an area of ongoing responsibility or a ++ specific decision and hand it over to another Developer or to the ++ Technical Committee.

    ++

    Once a particular decision has been delegated and made the ++ Project Leader may not withdraw that delegation; however, they may ++ withdraw an ongoing delegation of particular area of ++ responsibility.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Lend authority to other Developers.

    ++

    The Project Leader may make statements of support for points of ++ view or for other members of the project, when asked or otherwise; ++ these statements have force if and only if the Leader would be ++ empowered to make the decision in question.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    Make any decision which requires urgent action.

    ++

    This does not apply to decisions which have only become ++ gradually urgent through lack of relevant action, unless there is a ++ fixed deadline.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    Make any decision for whom noone else has responsibility.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    Propose draft General Resolutions and amendments.

    ++
  10. ++
  11. ++

    Together with the Technical Committee, appoint new members to ++ the Committee. (See §6.2.)

    ++
  12. ++
  13. ++

    Use a casting vote when Developers vote.

    ++

    The Project Leader also has a normal vote in such ballots.

    ++
  14. ++
  15. ++

    Vary the discussion period for Developers' votes (as above).

    ++
  16. ++
  17. ++

    Lead discussions amongst Developers.

    ++

    The Project Leader should attempt to participate in discussions ++ amongst the Developers in a helpful way which seeks to bring the ++ discussion to bear on the key issues at hand. The Project Leader ++ should not use the Leadership position to promote their own ++ personal views.

    ++
  18. ++
  19. ++

    In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting ++ property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See ++ §9.). Such decisions are communicated to the members by the ++ Project Leader or their Delegate(s). Major expenditures ++ should be proposed and debated on the mailing list before ++ funds are disbursed.

    ++
  20. ++
  21. ++

    Add or remove organizations from the list of trusted ++ organizations (see §9.3) that are authorized to accept and ++ hold assets for Debian. The evaluation and discussion leading ++ up to such a decision occurs on an electronic mailing list ++ designated by the Project Leader or their Delegate(s), on ++ which any developer may post. There is a minimum discussion ++ period of two weeks before an organization may be added to ++ the list of trusted organizations.

    ++
  22. ++
++

5.2. Appointment

++
    ++
  1. The Project Leader is elected by the Developers.
  2. ++
  3. The election begins six weeks before the leadership post becomes ++ vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
  4. ++
  5. For the first week any Developer may nominate ++ themselves as a candidate Project Leader, and summarize their plans for their term.
  6. ++
  7. For three weeks after that no more candidates may be nominated; ++ candidates should use this time for campaigning and discussion. If ++ there are no candidates at the end of the nomination period then the ++ nomination period is extended for an additional week, repeatedly if ++ necessary.
  8. ++
  9. The next two weeks are the polling period during which ++ Developers may cast their votes. Votes in leadership elections are ++ kept secret, even after the election is finished.
  10. ++
  11. The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have ++ nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of The ++ Above. If None Of The Above wins the election then the election ++ procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.
  12. ++
  13. ++ The decision will be made using the method specified in section ++ §A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. The quorum is the ++ same as for a General Resolution (§4.2) and the default ++ option is None Of The Above. ++
  14. ++
  15. The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.
  16. ++
++

5.3. Procedure

++

The Project Leader should attempt to make decisions which are ++consistent with the consensus of the opinions of the Developers.

++

Where practical the Project Leader should informally solicit the ++views of the Developers.

++

The Project Leader should avoid overemphasizing their own point of ++view when making decisions in their capacity as Leader.

++

6. Technical committee

++

6.1. Powers

++

The Technical Committee may:

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Decide on any matter of technical policy.

    ++

    This includes the contents of the technical policy manuals, ++ developers' reference materials, example packages and the behaviour ++ of non-experimental package building tools. (In each case the usual ++ maintainer of the relevant software or documentation makes ++ decisions initially, however; see 6.3(5).)

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions ++ overlap.

    ++

    In cases where Developers need to implement compatible ++ technical policies or stances (for example, if they disagree about ++ the priorities of conflicting packages, or about ownership of a ++ command name, or about which package is responsible for a bug that ++ both maintainers agree is a bug, or about who should be the ++ maintainer for a package) the technical committee may decide the ++ matter.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    Make a decision when asked to do so.

    ++

    Any person or body may delegate a decision of their own to the ++ Technical Committee, or seek advice from it.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).

    ++

    The Technical Committee may ask a Developer to take a ++ particular technical course of action even if the Developer does ++ not wish to; this requires a 3:1 majority. For example, the ++ Committee may determine that a complaint made by the submitter of a ++ bug is justified and that the submitter's proposed solution should ++ be implemented.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    Offer advice.

    ++

    The Technical Committee may make formal announcements about its ++ views on any matter. Individual members may of course make ++ informal statements about their views and about the likely views of ++ the committee.

    ++
  10. ++
  11. ++

    Together with the Project Leader, appoint new members to itself ++ or remove existing members. (See §6.2.)

    ++
  12. ++
  13. ++

    Appoint the Chairman of the Technical Committee.

    ++

    ++ The Chairman is elected by the Committee from its members. All ++ members of the committee are automatically nominated; the ++ committee votes starting one week before the post will become ++ vacant (or immediately, if it is already too late). The members ++ may vote by public acclamation for any fellow committee member, ++ including themselves; there is no default option. The vote ++ finishes when all the members have voted, or when the voting ++ period has ended. The result is determined using the method ++ specified in section A.6 of the Standard Resolution Procedure. ++

    ++
  14. ++
  15. ++

    The Chairman can stand in for the Leader, together with the ++ Secretary

    ++

    As detailed in §7.1(2), the Chairman of the Technical ++ Committee and the Project Secretary may together stand in for the ++ Leader if there is no Leader.

    ++
  16. ++
++

6.2. Composition

++
    ++
  1. ++

    The Technical Committee consists of up to 8 Developers, and ++ should usually have at least 4 members.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    When there are fewer than 8 members the Technical Committee may ++ recommend new member(s) to the Project Leader, who may choose ++ (individually) to appoint them or not.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    When there are 5 members or fewer the Technical Committee may ++ appoint new member(s) until the number of members reaches 6.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    When there have been 5 members or fewer for at least one week ++ the Project Leader may appoint new member(s) until the number of ++ members reaches 6, at intervals of at least one week per ++ appointment.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they ++ may remove or replace an existing member of the Technical ++ Committee.

    ++
  10. ++
++

6.3. Procedure

++
    ++
  1. ++

    The Technical Committee uses the Standard Resolution ++ Procedure.

    ++

    A draft resolution or amendment may be proposed by any member ++ of the Technical Committee. There is no minimum discussion period; ++ the voting period lasts for up to one week, or until the outcome is ++ no longer in doubt. Members may change their votes. There is a ++ quorum of two.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Details regarding voting

    ++

    The Chairman has a casting vote. When the Technical Committee ++ votes whether to override a Developer who also happens to be a ++ member of the Committee, that member may not vote (unless they are ++ the Chairman, in which case they may use only their casting ++ vote).

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    Public discussion and decision-making.

    ++

    Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by ++ members of the committee, are made public on the Technical ++ Committee public discussion list. There is no separate secretary ++ for the Committee.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    Confidentiality of appointments.

    ++

    The Technical Committee may hold confidential discussions via ++ private email or a private mailing list or other means to discuss ++ appointments to the Committee. However, votes on appointments must ++ be public.

    ++
  8. ++
  9. ++

    No detailed design work.

    ++

    The Technical Committee does not engage in design of new ++ proposals and policies. Such design work should be carried out by ++ individuals privately or together and discussed in ordinary ++ technical policy and design forums.

    ++

    The Technical Committee restricts itself to choosing from or ++ adopting compromises between solutions and decisions which have ++ been proposed and reasonably thoroughly discussed elsewhere.

    ++

    Individual members of the technical committee may of ++ course participate on their own behalf in any aspect of design and ++ policy work.

    ++
  10. ++
  11. ++

    Technical Committee makes decisions only as last resort.

    ++

    The Technical Committee does not make a technical decision ++ until efforts to resolve it via consensus have been tried and ++ failed, unless it has been asked to make a decision by the person ++ or body who would normally be responsible for it.

    ++
  12. ++
++

7. The Project Secretary

++

7.1. Powers

++

The Secretary:

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Takes votes amongst the Developers, and determines the number ++ and identity of Developers, whenever this is required by the ++ constitution.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Can stand in for the Leader, together with the Chairman of the ++ Technical Committee.

    ++

    If there is no Project Leader then the Chairman of the ++ Technical Committee and the Project Secretary may by joint ++ agreement make decisions if they consider it imperative to do ++ so.

    ++
  4. ++
  5. ++

    Adjudicates any disputes about interpretation of the ++ constitution.

    ++
  6. ++
  7. ++

    May delegate part or all of their authority to someone else, or ++ withdraw such a delegation at any time.

    ++
  8. ++
++

7.2. Appointment

++

The Project Secretary is appointed by the Project Leader and the ++current Project Secretary.

++

If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot agree ++on a new appointment, they must ask the Developers by way of ++General Resolution to appoint a Secretary.

++

If there is no Project Secretary or the current Secretary is ++unavailable and has not delegated authority for a decision then the ++decision may be made or delegated by the Chairman of the Technical ++Committee, as Acting Secretary.

++

The Project Secretary's term of office is 1 year, at which point ++they or another Secretary must be (re)appointed.

++

7.3. Procedure

++

The Project Secretary should make decisions which are fair and ++reasonable, and preferably consistent with the consensus of the ++Developers.

++

When acting together to stand in for an absent Project Leader the ++Chairman of the Technical Committee and the Project Secretary should ++make decisions only when absolutely necessary and only when consistent ++with the consensus of the Developers.

++

8. The Project Leader's Delegates

++

8.1. Powers

++

The Project Leader's Delegates:

++
    ++
  1. have powers delegated to them by the Project Leader;
  2. ++
  3. may make certain decisions which the Leader may not make ++ directly, including approving or expelling Developers or designating ++ people as Developers who do not maintain packages. This is to ++ avoid concentration of power, particularly over membership as a ++ Developer, in the hands of the Project Leader.
  4. ++
++

8.2. Appointment

++

The Delegates are appointed by the Project Leader and may be ++replaced by the Leader at the Leader's discretion. The Project Leader ++may not make the position as a Delegate conditional on particular ++decisions by the Delegate, nor may they override a decision made by a ++Delegate once made.

++

8.3. Procedure

++

Delegates may make decisions as they see fit, but should attempt to ++implement good technical decisions and/or follow consensus opinion.

++

9. Assets held in trust for Debian

++

In most jurisdictions around the world, the Debian project is not ++in a position to directly hold funds or other property. Therefore, ++property has to be owned by any of a number of organisations as ++detailed in §9.2.

++

Traditionally, SPI was the sole organisation authorized to hold ++property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in ++the U.S. to hold money in trust there.

++

SPI and Debian are separate ++organisations who share some goals. ++Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI.

++

9.1. Relationship with Associated Organizations

++
    ++
  1. ++

    Debian Developers do not become agents or employees of ++ organisations holding assets in trust for Debian, or of ++ each other, or of persons in authority in the Debian Project, ++ solely by the virtue of being Debian Developers. A person ++ acting as a Developer does so as an individual, on their own ++ behalf. Such organisations may, of their own accord, ++ establish relationships with individuals who are also Debian ++ developers.

    ++
  2. ++
++

9.2. Authority

++
    ++
  1. ++

    An organisation holding assets for Debian has no authority ++ regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical decisions, except ++ that no decision by Debian with respect to any property held ++ by the organisation shall require it to act outside its legal ++ authority.

    ++
  2. ++
  3. ++

    Debian claims no authority over an organisation that holds ++ assets for Debian other than that over the use of property ++ held in trust for Debian.

    ++
  4. ++
++

9.3. Trusted organisations

++

Any donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a ++set of organisations designated by the Project leader (or a ++delegate) to be authorized to handle assets to be used for the ++Debian Project.

++

Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should ++undertake reasonable obligations for the handling of such ++assets.

++

Debian maintains a public List of Trusted Organisations that ++accept donations and hold assets in trust for Debian ++(including both tangible property and intellectual property) ++that includes the commitments those organisations have made as ++to how those assets will be handled.

++

A. Standard Resolution Procedure

++

These rules apply to communal decision-making by committees and ++plebiscites, where stated above.

++

A.1. Proposal

++

The formal procedure begins when a draft resolution is proposed and ++sponsored, as required.

++

A.1. Discussion and Amendment

++
    ++
  1. Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed. ++ Amendments may be made formal by being proposed and sponsored ++ according to the requirements for a new resolution, or directly by ++ the proposer of the original resolution.
  2. ++
  3. A formal amendment may be accepted by the resolution's proposer, ++ in which case the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to ++ match.
  4. ++
  5. If a formal amendment is not accepted, or one of the sponsors of ++ the resolution does not agree with the acceptance by the proposer of ++ a formal amendment, the amendment remains as an amendment and will be ++ voted on.
  6. ++
  7. If an amendment accepted by the original proposer is not to the ++ liking of others, they may propose another amendment to reverse the ++ earlier change (again, they must meet the requirements for proposer ++ and sponsor(s).)
  8. ++
  9. The proposer of a resolution may suggest changes to the wordings ++ of amendments; these take effect if the proposer of the amendment ++ agrees and none of the sponsors object. In this case the changed ++ amendments will be voted on instead of the originals.
  10. ++
  11. The proposer of a resolution may make changes to correct minor ++ errors (for example, typographical errors or inconsistencies) or ++ changes which do not alter the meaning, providing noone objects ++ within 24 hours. In this case the minimum discussion period is not ++ restarted.
  12. ++
++

A.2. Calling for a vote

++
    ++
  1. The proposer or a sponsor of a motion or an amendment may call ++ for a vote, providing that the minimum discussion period (if any) has ++ elapsed.
  2. ++
  3. ++ The proposer or any sponsor of a resolution may call for a vote on that ++ resolution and all related amendments. ++
  4. ++
  5. The person who calls for a vote states what they believe the ++ wordings of the resolution and any relevant amendments are, and ++ consequently what form the ballot should take. However, the final ++ decision on the form of ballot(s) is the Secretary's - see 7.1(1), ++ 7.1(3) and A.3(4).
  6. ++
  7. ++ The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last ++ formal amendment was accepted, or since the whole resolution ++ was proposed if no amendments have been proposed and accepted. ++
  8. ++
++

A.3. Voting procedure

++
    ++
  1. ++ Each resolution and its related amendments is voted on in a ++ single ballot that includes an option for the original ++ resolution, each amendment, and the default option (where ++ applicable). ++
  2. ++
  3. ++ The default option must not have any supermajority requirements. ++ Options which do not have an explicit supermajority requirement ++ have a 1:1 majority requirement. ++
  4. ++
  5. ++ The votes are counted according to the rules in A.6. The ++ default option is Further Discussion, unless specified ++ otherwise. ++
  6. ++
  7. In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on matters ++ of procedure.
  8. ++
++

A.4. Withdrawing resolutions or unaccepted amendments

++

The proposer of a resolution or unaccepted amendment may withdraw ++it. In this case new proposers may come forward keep it alive, in which ++case the first person to do so becomes the new proposer and any others ++become sponsors if they aren't sponsors already.

++

A sponsor of a resolution or amendment (unless it has been ++accepted) may withdraw.

++

If the withdrawal of the proposer and/or sponsors means that a ++resolution has no proposer or not enough sponsors it will not be voted ++on unless this is rectified before the resolution expires.

++

A.5. Expiry

++

++ If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on or ++ otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks the secretary may issue a statement ++ that the issue is being withdrawn. If none of the sponsors of any ++ of the proposals object within a week, the issue is withdrawn. ++

++

++ The secretary may also include suggestions on how to proceed, ++ if appropriate. ++

++

A.6. Vote Counting

++
    ++
  1. Each voter's ballot ranks the options being voted on. Not all ++ options need be ranked. Ranked options are considered ++ preferred to all unranked options. Voters may rank options ++ equally. Unranked options are considered to be ranked equally ++ with one another. Details of how ballots may be filled out ++ will be included in the Call For Votes. ++
  2. ++
  3. If the ballot has a quorum requirement R any options other ++ than the default option which do not receive at least R votes ++ ranking that option above the default option are dropped from ++ consideration. ++
  4. ++
  5. Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default option ++ by its required majority ratio is dropped from consideration. ++
      ++
    1. ++ Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters ++ who prefer option A over option B. ++
    2. ++
    3. ++ An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ++ ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A). ++
    4. ++
    5. ++ If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ratio ++ is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1. ++
    6. ++
    ++
  6. ++
  7. From the list of undropped options, we generate a list of ++ pairwise defeats. ++
      ++
    1. ++ An option A defeats an option B, if V(A,B) is strictly greater ++ than V(B,A). ++
    2. ++
    ++
  8. ++
  9. From the list of [undropped] pairwise defeats, we generate a ++ set of transitive defeats. ++
      ++
    1. ++ An option A transitively defeats an option C if A defeats ++ C or if there is some other option B where A defeats B AND ++ B transitively defeats C. ++
    2. ++
    ++
  10. ++
  11. We construct the Schwartz set from the set of transitive defeats. ++
      ++
    1. ++ An option A is in the Schwartz set if for all options B, ++ either A transitively defeats B, or B does not transitively ++ defeat A. ++
    2. ++
    ++
  12. ++
  13. If there are defeats between options in the Schwartz set, ++ we drop the weakest such defeats from the list of pairwise ++ defeats, and return to step 5. ++
      ++
    1. ++ A defeat (A,X) is weaker than a defeat (B,Y) if V(A,X) ++ is less than V(B,Y). Also, (A,X) is weaker than (B,Y) if ++ V(A,X) is equal to V(B,Y) and V(X,A) is greater than V(Y,B). ++
    2. ++
    3. ++ A weakest defeat is a defeat that has no other defeat weaker ++ than it. There may be more than one such defeat. ++
    4. ++
    ++
  14. ++
  15. If there are no defeats within the Schwartz set, then the winner ++ is chosen from the options in the Schwartz set. If there is ++ only one such option, it is the winner. If there are multiple ++ options, the elector with the casting vote chooses which of those ++ options wins. ++
  16. ++
++

++ Note: Options which the voters rank above the default option ++ are options they find acceptable. Options ranked below the default ++ options are options they find unacceptable. ++

++

When the Standard Resolution Procedure is to be used, the text ++which refers to it must specify what is sufficient to have a draft ++resolution proposed and/or sponsored, what the minimum discussion ++period is, and what the voting period is. It must also specify any ++supermajority and/or the quorum (and default option) to be ++used.

++

B. Use of language and typography

++

The present indicative (is, for example) means that the statement ++is a rule in this constitution. May or can indicates that the ++person or body has discretion. Should means that it would be ++considered a good thing if the sentence were obeyed, but it is not ++binding. Text marked as a citation, such as this, is rationale ++and does not form part of the constitution. It may be used only to aid ++interpretation in cases of doubt.

++
++
++ ++ ++ diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/informal-propose index 0000000,0000000..89527f6 new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/informal-propose @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,41 @@@ ++===== TC RESOLUTION STARTS ===== ++ ++1. The Debian Technical Committee hereby exercises its power in ++ 4.2(1) of the Debian Constitution to propose the following ++ General Resolution: ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS ----- ++ ++ Constitutional Amendment: Permit TC to hold informal private conversations ++ ++ On a number of occasions recently, enquirers have emailed TC ++ members' personal addreses to informally seek members' views. This ++ has worked well; however it is not clear that Constitution permits ++ it. This situation should be regularised. ++ ++ On occasion the TC has been asked to decide on maintainership of ++ packages. It is very difficult to hold the necessary discussions, ++ which inevitably involve discussion of personalities, in public. ++ ++ At the moment the TC is unable to take on a mediation role, since ++ mediation necessarily involves each party to a dispute conversing ++ privately with the mediator. The TC should be able to mediate if ++ the TC, and parties to a dispute, wish it to do so. ++ ++ Actual decisionmaking must still place in public of course. ++ ++ Therefore, amend the Debian Constitution 6.3 as follows (wdiff -i): ++ ++ 3. Public [-discussion and-] decision-making. ++ ++ [-Discussion,-] ++ Draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by members of the ++ committee, are made public on the Technical Committee public ++ discussion list. There is no separate secretary for the ++ Committee. ++ ++ [+The Technical Committee should limit private ++ discussions to situations where holding the conversation in ++ public would be infeasible or counterproductive.+] ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION ENDS ----- diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/numberfix-propose index 0000000,0000000..3397976 new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/numberfix-propose @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,19 @@@ ++===== TC RESOLUTION STARTS ===== ++ ++1. The Debian Technical Committee hereby exercises its power in ++ 4.2(1) of the Debian Constitution to propose the following ++ General Resolution: ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS ----- ++ ++ Constitutional Amendment: Fix duplicate section numbering. ++ ++ The current Debian Constitution has two sections numbered A.1. ++ This does not currently give rise to any ambiguity but it is ++ undesirable. ++ ++ Fix this with the following semantically neutral amendment: ++ ++ - Renumber the first section A.1 to A.0. ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION ENDS ----- diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/overrule-propose index 0000000,0000000..631e10b new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/overrule-propose @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,33 @@@ ++=== TC RESOLUTION STARTS === ++ ++1. The Debian Technical Committee hereby exercises its power in 4.2(1) ++ of the Debian Constitution to propose a General Resolution, ++ and according to A.1(1) the TC also proposes an amendment. ++ ++ The proposed texts of the two resulting options for the General ++ Resolution are as follows: ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS, COMMON INTRODUCTORY TEXT ----- ++ ++ Advice to the TC on overruling maintainers ++ ++ In the past the Technical Committee have been reluctant to overrule ++ a maintainer unless all the members are absolutely convinced that ++ the maintainer's decision was wrong. ++ ++ The TC has sought the views of the Developers. Accordingly, the ++ Developers advise, in their (non-binding) opinion, that: ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION OPTION A ----- ++ ++ The Technical Committee's approach so far has been correct. ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION OPTION B ----- ++ ++ Technical Committee members should be willing to vote to overrule if ++ they feel that the maintainer's decision was wrong; the ++ supermajority requirement is sufficient to guard against overruling ++ in questionable cases. ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION ENDS ----- ++ diff --cc dir=636783_supermajority/supermajority-propose index 0000000,0000000..5f76592 new file mode 100644 --- /dev/null +++ b/dir=636783_supermajority/supermajority-propose @@@ -1,0 -1,0 +1,71 @@@ ++=== TC RESOLUTION STARTS === ++ ++1. The Debian Technical Committee hereby exercises its power in ++ 4.2(1) of the Debian Constitution to propose the following ++ General Resolution: ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS ----- ++ ++ Constitutional Amendment- TC Supermajority Fix ++ ++ Prior to the Clone Proof SSD GR in June 2003, the Technical ++ Committee could overrule a Developer with a supermajority of 3:1. ++ ++ Unfortunately, the definition of supermajorities in the SSD GR has a ++ fencepost error. In the new text a supermajority requirement is met ++ only if the ratio of votes in favour to votes against is strictly ++ greater than the supermajority ratio. ++ ++ In the context of the Technical Committee voting to overrule a ++ developer that means that it takes 4 votes to overcome a single ++ dissenter. And with a maximum committee size of 8, previously two ++ dissenters could be overruled by all 6 remaining members; now that ++ is no longer possible. ++ ++ This change was unintentional, was contrary to the original intent ++ of the Constitution, and is unhelpful. ++ ++ Therefore, amend the Debian Constitution as follows: ++ ++ (i) Replace "majority" with "supermajority" everywhere a ratio ++ other than 1:1 is specified. That is, in ++ 4.1(2) -- Developers' power to amend the Constitution ++ 4.1(4) -- Developers' power to overrule the TC ++ 4.1(5)(3) -- Developers' power to amend Foundation Documents ++ 6.1(4) -- TC's power to overrule a Developer (both occurrences) ++ replace the word "majority" with "supermajority". ++ ++ (ii) In A.6(3): ++ ++ 3. Any (non-default) option which does not defeat the default ++ option by its required majority ratio is dropped from ++ consideration. ++ 1. Given two options A and B, V(A,B) is the number of voters ++ who prefer option A over option B. ++ - 2. An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ++ - ratio N, if V(A,D) is strictly greater than N * V(D,A). ++ - 3. If a supermajority of S:1 is required for A, its majority ++ - ratio is S; otherwise, its majority ratio is 1. ++ + 2. An option A defeats the default option D by its ++ + required majority ratio if both: ++ + (a) V(A,D) is strictly greater than V(D,A); and ++ + (b) if a supermajority of N:M is required for A, ++ + M * V(A,D) is greater than or equal to N * V(D,A). ++ ++ (iii) In A.3(2) "Voting procedure", delete as follows: ++ 2. The default option must not have any supermajority requirements. ++ - Options which do not have an explicit supermajority requirement ++ - have a 1:1 majority requirement. ++ ++ The effect is to fix the fencepost bug, and make the wording ++ consistent, by always referring to "supermajorities" where ++ applicable. A 1:1 vote will need strictly more in favour than ++ against, but an N:1 vote will need only exactly N:1. This will ++ also have a (negligible) effect on any General Resolutions ++ requiring supermajorities. ++ ++ For the avoidance of any doubt, this change does not affect any ++ votes (whether General Resolutions or votes in the Technical ++ Committee) in progress at the time the change is made. ++ ++ ----- GENERAL RESOLUTION ENDS -----