Re: Comments on the constitution?
Bernd Zeimetz <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.curiosa |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 08/31/2011 12:20 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Steve McIntyre dijo [Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 08:16:19PM +0100]: >>> Humm… An idea could be: >>> >>> ‣ The term is defined to be for one year, with the possibility of one >>> automatic renewal >>> ‣ If by (election date + 10 months) the DPL sends a (signed, >>> validated, blah) message, a simple referendum is held: secret vote >>> between a "yes" and a "no" (and... Further discussion? :-} ) >>> ‣ If the DPL seeking renewal gets a majority, his term is prolonged to >>> a second year >>> ‣ If the DPL does not get a majority, he can still participate in a >>> regular election >>> ‣ This mechanism can only be used once — A DPL wanting to run a third >>> term must win a regular (full) election >> >> /me shudders at the extra complexity, especially how it would be >> worded in the constitution. I'm tempted to say: let's just leave >> things the way they are. > > Oh, just wait until we get in DEP(n+1) where we require the > Constitution to be automatically parsable as well. That would be DEP(n+2) as DEP(n+1) is the one which requires automatically parsable DEPs. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]