Ian Jackson writes:
> I would accept increasing the required number of stoppers to two
> (which is also the quorum for passing a resolution).
That's certainly preferable to one.
> And, secondly, that the ultimate outcome of separate votes on
> semantically related resolutions might be incoheren
Bdale Garbee writes ("Re: Bug#636783: minimum discussion period"):
> If I understand this correctly, either there is a 5-day minimum
> discussion period, *or* there must be unanimous consent of the committee
> to waive the minimum period?
Yes, that is my proposal.
> I don&
Ian Jackson writes:
> I would like to present an improved proposal for a minimum TC
> discussionn period, which will allow the committee to move quickly
> when there is consensus (at least, procedural consensus) within the
> committee:
In the general case, a discussion period is clearly desired.
I would like to present an improved proposal for a minimum TC
discussionn period, which will allow the committee to move quickly
when there is consensus (at least, procedural consensus) within the
committee:
* Constitution 6.3(1), delete
- There is no minimum discussion period;
and repla
4 matches
Mail list logo
