Proposed constitution for the Debian Project (v0.2)
1. Introduction
The Debian Project is an association of individuals who have made
common cause to create a free operating system. This document
describes what decisions are made how in the Debian Project.
This document describes the organisational structure for formal
decisionmaking in the Project. It does not describe the
goals of the Project or how it achieves them, or contain any
specific nontechnical policies not directly related to the
decisionmaking process.
2. Decisionmaking bodies and individuals
Each decision in the Project is made by one or more of the following:
- The individual developer working on a particular task;
- The developers, by way of General Resolution or an election;
- The Project Leader;
- The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;
- The Project Secretary;
- Delegates appointed by the Project Leader for specific
tasks.
Most of the remainder of this document will outline the powers of
these bodies, their composition and appointment, and the procedure
for their decisionmaking. The powers of a person or body may be
subject to review and/or limitation by others; in this case the
reviewing body or person's entry will state this.
2.1. General rules
Nothing in this constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to
do work for the Project. A person who does not want to do
perform a task which has been delegated or assigned to them does
not need to do it. However, they must not actively work against
these rules and decisions properly made under them.
-
A person may hold several posts, except that the Project Leader,
Project Secretary and the Chairman of the Technical Committee must
be distinct, and that the Leader cannot appoint themselves as
their own Delegate.
3. Individual developers
3.1. Powers
An individual developer may
- make any technical or nontechnical decision with regard to
their own work;
- propose or second draft General Resolutions;
- propose themselves as a Project Leader candidate in elections;
- vote on General Resolutions and in Leadership elections.
3.2. Composition and appointment
Developers are volunteers who agree to further the aims of the
Project insofar as they participate in it, and who maintain
package(s) for the Project or do other work which the Project
Leader's Delegate(s) consider worthwhile.
The Project Leader's Delegate(s) may choose not to admit new
developers, or expel existing evelopers. If the developers
feel that the Delegates are abusing their authority they can of
course override the decision by way of General Resolution - see
s.4.1(3), s.4.2.
3.3. Procedure
Developers may make these decisions as they see fit.
4. The developers by way of General Resolution or election
4.1. Powers
Together, the developers may:
Appoint or recall the Project Leader.
Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority.
Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.
These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
policies such as the free software licence terms that Debian
software must meet.
They may also include position statements about issues of the day.
Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions
about Debian's property. (See s.9.1.)
4.2. Procedure
The developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below. A
resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any developer
and seconded by at least Q other developers, or if proposed by the
Project Leader or the Technical Committee.
If a resolution to overrule a decision by the Project Leader or
their Delegate is seconded by at least 2Q developers (or Q
developers in the case of a resolution to overrule a decison to
vary a discussion or voting period), or is proposed or seconded
by the Technical Committee, it will (if it so requests) stay the
relevant decision. In this case an immediate vote is held to
determine whether the decision will stand or its implementation
be delayed until the Standard Resolution Procedure is complete.
The Project Leader or Delegate (as appropriate) may prevent this
vote by withdrawing their decision.
Votes are secret and taken by the Project Secretary. The voting
period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the
Project Leader.
The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1
week by the Project Leader. The Project Leader has only a casting
vote.
Q, above, is half of the square root of the number of current
developers.
5. Project Leader
5.1. Powers
The Project Leader may:
- Appoint Delegates or delegate decisions to the Technical
Committee.
The Leader may define an area of ongoing responsibility or a
specific decision and hand it over to another developer or
to the Techical Committee.
Once a particular decision has been delegated and made the
Project Leader may not withdraw that delegation; however,
they may withdraw an ongoing delegation of particular area
of responsibility.
Lend authority to other developers.
The Project Leader may make statements of support for points of view
or for other members of the project, when asked or otherwise; these
statements have force if and only if the Leader would be empowered to
make the decision in question.
Make any decision which requires urgent action.
This does not apply to decisions which have only become
gradually urgent through lack of relevant action, unless
there is a fixed deadline.
Make any decision for whom noone else has responsibility.
Propose draft General Resolutions and amendments.
Together with the Technical Committee, appoint new members
to the Committee. (See s.6.2.)
- Use a casting vote when Developers vote.
The Project Leader does not have a normal vote in such ballots.
Vary the discussion period for developers' votes (as above).
Lead discussions amongst developers.
The Project Leader should attempt to participate in discussions
amongst the developers in a helpful way which seeks to bring the
discussion to bear on the key issues at hand. The Project Leader
should not use the Leadership position to promote their own personal
views.
Together with SPI, make decisions affecting Debian's
property. (See s.9.1.)
5.2. Appointment
-
The Project Leader is elected by the developers.
-
The election begins nine weeks before the leadership post becomes
vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
-
For the following three weeks any developer may nominate themselves as
a candidate Project Leader.
-
For three weeks after that no more candidates may be nominated;
candidates should use this time for campaigning (to make their
identities and positions known). If there are no candidates
at the end of the nomination period then the nomination period
is extended for three further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.
-
The next three weeks are the polling period during which developers
may cast their votes.
-
The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have
nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of
The Above. The decison will be made using the Concorde Vote
Counting. If None Of The Above wins the election then the
election procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.
-
The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.
5.3. Procedure
The Project Leader should attempt to make decisions which are
consistent with the consensus of the opinions of the developers.
Where practical the Project Leader should informally solicit the views
of the developers.
The Project Leader should avoid overemphasizing their own point
of view when making decisions in their capacity as Leader.
6. Technical committee
6.1. Powers
The Technical Committee may:
- Decide on any matter of technical policy.
This includes the contents of the technical policy manuals,
developers' reference materials, example packages and the
behaviour of non-experimental package building tools. (In
each case the usual maintainer of the relevant software or
documentation makes decisions initially, however; see
6.3(5).)
- Decide any technical matter where developers' jurisdictions overlap.
In cases where developers need to implement compatible
technical policies or stances (for example, if they disagree
about the priorities of conflicting packages, or about
ownership of a command name, or about which package is
responsible for a bug that both maintainers agree is a bug,
or about who should be the maintainer for a package) the
technical committee may decide the matter.
Make a decision when asked to do so.
Any person or body may delegate a decision of their own to
the Technical Committee, or seek advice from it.
Overrule a developer (requires a 3:1 majority).
The Technical Committee may ask a developer to take a
particular technical course of action even if the developer
does not wish to; this requires a 3:1 majority. For
example, the Committee may determine that a complaint made
by the submitter of a bug is justified and that the
submitter's proposed solution should be implemented.
Offer advice.
The Technical Committee may make formal or informal
announcements about its views on any matter.
Together with the Project Leader, appoint new members to
itself. (See s.6.2.)
Appoint the Chairman of the Technical Committee.
The Chairman is elected by the Committee from its members.
All members of the committee are automatically nominated;
the committee vote starting one week before the post will
become vacant (or immediately, if it is already too late).
The members may vote by public acclamation for any fellow
committee member, including themselves; there is no None Of
The Above option. The vote finishes when all the members
have voted or when the outcome is no longer in doubt. The
result is determined according to Concorde Vote Counting.
- The Chairman can stand in for the Leader, together with the Secretary
As detailed in s.7.1(2), the Chairman of the Technical
Committee and the Project Secretary may together stand in
for the Leader if there is no Leader.
6.2. Composition
The Technical Committee consists of up to 8 developers, and should
usually have at least 4 members.
When there are fewer than 8 members the Technical Committee may
recommend new member(s) to the Project Leader, who may choose
(individually) to appoint them or not.
When there are 5 members or fewer the Technical Committee may appoint
new member(s) until the number of members reaches 6.
When there have been 5 members or fewer for at least one week
the Project Leader may appoint new member(s) until the number of
members reaches 6, at intervals of at least one week per
appointment.
6.3. Procedure
- The Technical Committee uses the Standard Resolution Procedure.
A draft resolution or amendment may be proposed by any
member of the Technical Committee. There is no minimum
discussion period; the voting period lasts for up to one
week, or until the outcome is no longer in doubt. The
Chairman has only a casting vote.
- Public discussion and decisionmaking.
Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by
members of the committee, are made public on the Technical
Committee public discussion list. There is no separate
secretary for the Committee.
-
Confidentiality of appointments.
The Technical Committee may hold confidential discussions
via private email or a private mailing list or other means
to discuss appointments to the Committee. However, votes on
appointments must be public.
-
No detailed design work.
Then Technical Committee does not engage in design of new proposals
and policies. Such design work should be carried out by individuals
privately or together and discussed in ordinary technical policy and
design forums.
The Technical Committee restricts itself to choosing from
or adopting compromises between solutions and decisions which have
been proposed and reasonably thoroughly discussed elsewhere.
Individual members of the technical commitee may of course
participate on their own behalf in any aspect of design and
policy work.
- Technical Committee makes decisions only as last resort.
The Technical Committee does not make a technical decision
until efforts to resolve it via consensus have been tried
and failed, unless it has been asked to make a decision by
the person or body who would normally be responsible for it.
7. The Project Secretary
7.1. Powers
The Secretary:
-
Takes votes amongst the Developers when required.
-
Can stand in for the Leader, together with the Chairman of
the Technical Committee.
If there is no Project Leader then the Chairman of the
Technical Committee and the Project Secretary may by
joint agreement make decisions if they consider it
imperative to do so.
-
Adjudicates any disputes about interpretation of the
constitution.
-
May delegate part or all of their authority to someone else,
or withdraw such a delegation at any time.
7.2. Appointment
The Project Secretary is appointed by the Project Leader and the
current Project Secretary.
If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot
agree on a new appointment they must ask the board of SPI to
appoint a Secretary.
If there is no Project Secretary or the current Secretary is
unavailable and has not delegated authority for a decision then
the decision may be made or delegated by the Chairman of the
Technical Committee, as Acting Secretary.
The Project Secretary's term of office is 1 year, at which point
they or another Secretary must be (re)appointed.
8. The Project Leader's Delegates
8.1. Powers
The Project Leader's Delegates:
- have powers delegated to them by the Project Leader;
- may make certain decisions which the Leader may not make
directly, including vetting or expelling developers or
designating people as developers who do not maintain packages.
This is to avoid concentration of power, particularly over
membership as a developer, in the hands of the Project
Leader.
8.2. Appointment
The Delegates are appointed by the Project Leader and may be
replaced by the Leader at their discretion. The Project Leader
may not make the position as a Delegate conditional on particular
decisons by the Delegate, nor may they override a decision made by
a Delegate once made.
8.3. Procedure
Delegates may make decisions as they see fit, but should attempt
to implement good technical decisions and/or follow consensus
opinion.
9. Software in the Public Interest
SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals.
Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI.
9.1. Management of Debian's property
-
SPI will hold Debian's money, trademarks and other tangible
and intangible property and manage other affairs requiring
legal personality, tax exempt status or the like.
-
Such property will be accounted for separately and held in
trust for Debian.
-
SPI does not spend money or otherwise dispose of or use
Debian's property without permission from Debian, which may be
granted by the Project Leader or by General Resolution of the
Developers.
-
SPI will consider spending money or disposing of Debian's
property when asked to do so by the Project Leader.
-
SPI will spend money or dispose of Debian's property when
asked to do so by a General Resolution of the Developers.
9.2. Authority
-
SPI has no authority regarding Debian's technical or
nontechnical decisions, except that no decision by Debian with
respect to Debian's property held by SPI shall require SPI to
act outside its legal authority, and that Debian may
occasionally use SPI as a decision body of last recourse.
-
Debian has no authority over SPI other than that over Debian's
property, as described above.
A. Standard Resolution Procedure
These rules apply to communal decisonmaking by committees and
plebiscites, where stated above.
A.1. Proposal
The formal procedure begins when a draft resolution is proposed and
seconded, as required.
A.1. Discussion and Amendment
-
Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed.
Amendments may be made formal by being proposed and seconded
(requirements as for a new resolution).
-
A formal amendment may be accepted by the proposer, in which case
the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to match.
-
If a formal amendment is not accepted, or one of the seconders of the
resolution does not agree with the acceptance by the proposer of a
formal amendment, the amendment remains and will be voted on.
-
If an amendment accepted by the original proposer is not to
the liking of others, they may propose another amendment to
reverse the earlier change (again, they must meet the
requirements for proposer and seconder(s).)
A.2. Calling for a vote
-
The proposer of a motion or an amendment may call for a vote,
providing that the minimum discussion period (if any) has
elapsed.
-
The proposer of a motion may call for a vote on any
or all of the amendments individually or together; the
proposer of an amendment may call for a vote only on that
amendment and related amendments.
-
The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the
last formal amendment was accepted, or the last related formal
amendment was accepted if an amendment is being voted on, or
since the whole resolution was proposed if no amendments have
been proposed and accepted.
A.3. Voting procedure
-
Each independent set of related amendments is voted on in a
separate ballot. Each such ballot has as options all the
sensible combinations of amendments and options, and an option
Further Discussion. If Further Discussion wins then the
entire resolution procedure is set back to the start of the
discussion period.
-
When the final form of the resolution has been determined it
is voted on in a final ballot, in which the options are Yes,
No and Further Discussion. If Further Discussion wins then
the entire procedure is set back to the start of the
discussion period.
-
The vote taker (if there is one) or the voters (if voting is
done by public pronouncement) may arrange for these ballots to
be held simultaneously, even (for example) using a single
voting message. If amendment ballot(s) and the final ballot
are combined in this way then it must be possible for a voter
to vote differently in the final ballot for each of the
possible forms of the final draft resolution.
-
Votes may be cast during the voting period, as specified
elsewhere.
-
The votes are counted according to the Concorde Vote Counting.
-
In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on
matters of procedure (for example, whether particular
amendments should be considered independent or not).
A.3. Withdrawing resolutions or amendments
The proposer and/or seconder(s) of a resolution or amendment
(unless it has been accepted) may withdraw it. In this case new
proposer(s) and/or seconder(s) may come forward keep it alive, in
which case the first remaining seconder becomes the new proposer
(if the original proposer withdrew) and in any case the other
proposer(s) and/or seconder(s) become seconders.
A.4. Expiry
If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on
or otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks then it is considered to have
been withdrawn.
A.5. Concorde Vote Counting
-
This is used to determine the winner amongst a list of
options. Each ballot paper gives a ranking of the voter's
preferred options. (The ranking need not be complete.)
-
Option A is said to Dominate option B if strictly more ballots
prefer A to B than prefer B to A.
-
All options which are Dominated by at least one other option
are discarded, and references to them in ballot papers will be
ignored.
-
If there is any option which Dominates all others then that is
the winner.
-
If there is now more than one option remaining Single
Transferrable Vote will be applied to choose amongst those
remaining:
-
The number of first preferences for each option is
counted, and if any option has more than half it is the
winner.
-
Otherwise the option with the lowest number of first
preferences is eliminated and its votes redistributed
according to the second preferences.
-
This elimination procedure is repeated, moving down ballot
papers to 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. preferences as required,
until one option gets more than half of the `first'
preferences.
-
In the case of ties the elector with a casting vote will
decide. That elector does not get a normal vote.
-
If a supermajority is required the number of Yes votes in the
final ballot is reduced by an appropriate factor. Strictly
speaking, for a supermajority of F:A, the number of ballots
which prefer Yes to X (when considering whether Yes Dominates
X or X Dominates Yes) or the number of ballots whose first
(remaining) preference is Yes (when doing STV comparisons for
winner and elimination purposes) is multiplied by a factor A/F
before the comparison is done.
This means that a 2:1 vote, for example, means twice as many
people voted for as against; abstentions are not counted.
When the Standard Resolution Procedure is to be used, the text
which refers to it must specify what is sufficient to have a draft
resolution proposed and/or seconded, what the minimum discussion
period is, and what the voting period is.
B. Use of language and typography
The present indicative (`is', for example) means that the
statement is a rule in this consitution. `May' or `can' indicates
that the person or body has discretion. `Should' means that it
would be considered a good thing if the sentence were obeyed, but
it is not binding.
Text marked as a citation, such as this, is rationale and
does not form part of the constitution. It may be used only to
aid interpretation in cases of doubt.