>>>>> "Adam" == Adam D Barratt <a...@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes:
I don't think it even means that. > 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. That is, if they introduced a resolution overriding a decision I made, I could not remove that resolution. I cannot change the decision they made. There's a related provision: > 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. Even that doesn't say that there cannot be overlaps in areas of responsibility; the thing that cannot be overidden is a *decision*. However, it is slightly more complicated: > 4. Make any decision for whom noone else has responsibility. It has generally been interpreted that once the DPL delegates something under 5.1 (4) that's something for whom someone else now has responsibility and so the DPL themselves cannot act. My interpretation is that the DPL can revise the delegation and potentially even create overlapping delegations, but in general (especially without special wording in the delegation text) cannot themselves act in such a situation. Which is to say that I strongly agree with the principle behind how we've interpreted it, I agree with the practical consequences I can think of, but there are some corner cases (that are unlikely to come up) where I think evolution of our thinking would be valuable. However none of this matters to the current situation. The power in question comes from 5.1(5) not 5.1(4). We'll save the question of whether I could write a delegation such that I delegated all of my 5.1(5) power and retained none of it myself: I'm definitely not doing that here.
