As per DEP 10, now that DEP 12 has been accepted by the technical board and ratified by the DSF Board, a TB vote must be held to decide if we should also require the DSF individual membership (and others who would be eligible to vote in Technical Board elections) to vote on it.
The question being posed is “Should we not require (skip) the DSF membership vote for DEP 12?”
We are copying how the normal approval votes are done and doing it in public, with votes of +1, 0, or -1 possible. A total score of 3 or above will be considered “no membership vote is required”, a score of 2 or lower will be considered “a membership vote is required”. I have arranged the question this way to ensure that the power of the -1 “veto” vote remains on the site of “membership vote required”.
Voting will run until 18th December 2022 Anywhere On Earth.
The DSF Board has already held their equivalent vote and decided to not require a membership vote.
I vote +1 (we do not need a membership vote) - I believe that the change is not significant enough to require a membership vote, as the only material changes in the DEP other than naming serve to make the TB/SC more reliable and more likely to perform all their duties as already outlined in DEP 10, and the administrative overhead of conducting that vote would be extra work for the DSF Board.
first off thank you Andrew for continuing to push this through. I do agree that the change is relatively small, but given the opposition and discussion around DEP 12 I’d like to see a vote (as such I vote -1) to ensure that the community as a whole sees it as beneficial.
Please note that this is by no means ment as opposition to the DEP itself and if there were a +/-0 I’d vote -0 instead.
As per the process, we also need a DSF board vote:
If the DSF Board accepts the motion, the DSF Board and the Technical Board SHALL then hold separate votes on the question of whether the proposed change is significant enough to require approval by the community at large. If both the DSF Board and the Technical Board determine that the proposal is not significant enough to require such approval, the proposal then SHALL be adopted and the DEP SHALL immediately begin implementation.
Since it requires a joint vote between us, I’m happy for us to vote this way. @andrewgodwin do you know where the DSF board vote is happening, if in public?
Alright, the vote has concluded with a total of +3, which means that both we and the DSF board have decided not to require a vote of the membership, and the DEP is fully accepted. I will notify the mailing lists and begin implementation (which is mostly renaming things).