I have a problem with this part:
> | We invite the DAM to further develop his ideas
> | in close coordination with other members of the project, and to present
> | a new and improved proposal on the project's mailinglists in the future,
> | at least two weeks prior to any planned implementation.
That's actually what Joerg already did: he discussed his proposal
secretly with some members of the project, then presented it on d-d-a,
and said that people could comment on it, and that he might (or not)
integrate some suggestions in his proposal before it takes effect.
Given the importance of those changes for the future of the Debian
project, I don't think that's enough. I would like to have an healthy
discussion on this topic. Since it's unlikely that we will all agree on
the same proposal, there will probably be several competing proposals
(like Lars' and Raphael's currently). And we could have a vote to decide
which proposal the Debian developers, as a whole, prefer.
It doesn't take much for this GR to go away. Joerg simply has to
say that any change in the membership process will be postponed until:
(A) it's clear that there's a large consensus about a proposed solution
(not the case neither for Joerg's proposal, nor for Lars' or
Raphael's, currently)
(B) we have a vote to decide which proposal we want.
As long as Joerg doesn't agree with that, I don't see why we should drop
the immediate vote or the GR itself.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |