Re: Reducing the discussion and the voting period to 1 week

2014-10-22 Thread Luca Falavigna
Hi Lucas, 2014-10-22 17:22 GMT+02:00 Lucas Nussbaum : > Charles, Luca, can you confirm that you are also fine with shortening > the discussion period to one week? Fine for me. Cheers, Luca -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl

Re: Alternative proposal: reaffirm maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain

2014-10-18 Thread Luca Falavigna
Hi Lucas, Thank you for your feedback! 2014-10-18 14:13 GMT+02:00 Lucas Nussbaum : > 1) packages may require the default init system if: > - their maintainer consider this a prerequisite for its proper operation > - no patches or other derived works exist in order to support other init > system

Re: Alternative proposal: reaffirm maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain

2014-10-18 Thread Luca Falavigna
Hi, Thank you for your feedback! 2014-10-18 13:50 GMT+02:00 The Wanderer : > Imagine that the maintainer of package foo decides, as they are entitled > to do under this proposal, that 'foo requires upstart for proper > operation' (choosing upstart just as an example here), and adds a > dependency

Alternative proposal: reaffirm maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain

2014-10-18 Thread Luca Falavigna
Dear fellow Developers, I would like to propose the following amendment proposal, and I hereby call for seconds. ** Begin Alternative Proposal ** 0. Rationale Debian has decided (via the Technical Committee) to change its default init system for the next release. The Technical Committee

Re: [RFC] Alternative proposal: reaffirm upstream and maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain

2014-10-17 Thread Luca Falavigna
2014-10-17 11:17 GMT+02:00 Thorsten Glaser : > Note that this paragraph *directly* goes against the *definition* of > a software distribution (take upstream software and integrate it with > the whole, occasionally going against upstream’s will) and towards a > unified userland.exe… Upstream could

[RFC] Alternative proposal: reaffirm upstream and maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain

2014-10-17 Thread Luca Falavigna
Dears, I'd like to draft an alternative proposal to the GR. Would anybody consider it a nice addition to the proposals we currently have, and eventually second it if I asked for it? Of course, improvements to the text are much more than welcome! ** Begin Alternative Proposal ** Proposal: Reaf

Re: Reducing the discussion and the voting period to 1 week

2014-10-17 Thread Luca Falavigna
2014-10-17 10:42 GMT+02:00 Lucas Nussbaum : > Note that our voting method is clone-proof, so one proposal cannot steal > votes from one another. That's one of the great things about Condorcet: > you can have similar proposals on the same ballot without causing the > votes to be split. Also numbers

Re: Reducing the discussion and the voting period to 1 week

2014-10-17 Thread Luca Falavigna
2014-10-17 10:01 GMT+02:00 Lucas Nussbaum : > So, I think that we need alternative proposal(s), [...] I agree with this point in principle, but we should avoid having too many options, leading to scattered votes. One party could "win" with less than 25% of the votes if the other ones are stealing