On Mon, 2022-09-05 at 21:51 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > You can argue that the developers making the installer and live images, > and those maintaining the website can make those decisions. You can even > say that they have made decisions. So those options could be seen as > overriding a Developer, using the power of the Technical Committee. > > Assuming we actually went that way, 6.1.4 requires a 3:1 majority, but > 4.1.4 only a 2:1 majority. I think we take the highest majority > requirement in that case, so 3:1.
I think it is bad to transfer supermajority requirements among one group of voters (tech-ctte) to a very different group of voters (all DD). Though I agree the constitution is not clear on this. It might be better to just get rid of both supermajority requirements: if 50% of all DDs agree on some implementation detail, it's probably fine to do it that way. I don't see a good reason to require 67% to agree: that would be the supermajority requirement for constitutional changes in several countries (e.g., Germany). The last part makes me think that the 3:1 supermajority requirement is probably also too high... Because of the low number of voters in tech- ctte it is practically often even higher than 3:1. So one should probably also drop or at least lower it for tech-ctte decisions and maybe lower it to 2:1 for changes to the constitution or foundation documents, matching real-life constitutional changes. Ansgar
