General Resolution: Altering package upload rules
Time Line
| Proposal and amendment | Thursday, 8th February, 2007 | Friday, 9th February, 2007 |
|---|---|---|
| Discussion Period: | Saturday, 10th February, 2007 | Saturday, 3rd March, 2007 |
| Voting Period | Sunday, 4th March, 00:00:00 UTC, 2007 | Sunday, 18th March, 00:00:00 UTC, 2007 |
Proposer
Bill Allombert [ballombe@debian.org]
Seconds
- Mike Hommey [glandium@debian.org]
- Sam Hocevar [sho@debian.org]
- Julien Danjou [acid@debian.org]
- Aurelien Jarno [aurelien@debian.org]
- Pierre Machard [pmachard@debian.org]
- Wesley J Landaker [wjl@debian.org]
Text
Choice 1. The actual text of the resolution is as follows. Please note that this does not include preludes, prologues, any preambles to the resolution, post-ambles to the resolution, abstracts, fore-words, after-words, rationales, supporting documents, opinion polls, arguments for and against, and any of the other important material you will find on the mailing list archives. Please read the debian-vote mailing list archives for details.
General Resolution: Altering package upload rules
The Debian project resolves that Debian developers allowed to perform combined source and binary packages uploads should be allowed to perform binary-only packages uploads for the same set of architectures.
Quorum
With the current list of voting developers, we have:
Current Developer Count = 1037
Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 16.1012421881046
K min(5, Q ) = 5
Quorum (3 x Q ) = 48.3037265643138
Quorum
- Option1 Reached quorum: 132 > 48.3037265643138
Data and Statistics
For this GR, as always statistics shall be gathered about ballots received and acknowledgements sent periodically during the voting period. Additionally, the list of voters would be made publicly available. Also, the tally sheet may also be viewed after to voting is done (Note that while the vote is in progress it is a dummy tally sheet).
Majority Requirement
The proposal needs simple majority.
Majority
- Option1 passes Majority. 1.138 (132/116) >= 1
Outcome
In the graph above, any pink colored nodes imply that the option did not pass majority, the Blue is the winner. The Octagon is used for the options that did not beat the default.
- Option 1
I support the proposal
- Option 2
Further Discussion
In the following table, tally[row x][col y] represents the votes that option x received over option y. A more detailed explanation of the beat matrix may help in understanding the table. For understanding the Condorcet method, the Wikipedia entry is fairly informative.
| Option | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| Option 1 | 132 | |
| Option 2 | 116 | |
Looking at row 2, column 1, Further Discussion
received 116 votes over I support the proposal
Looking at row 1, column 2, I support the proposal
received 132 votes over Further Discussion.
Pair-wise defeats
- Option 1 defeats Option 2 by ( 132 - 116) = 16 votes.
The Schwartz Set contains
- Option 1 "I support the proposal"
The winner
- Option 1 "I support the proposal"
Debian uses the Condorcet method for voting.
Simplistically, plain Condorcets method
can be stated like so :
Consider all possible two-way races between candidates.
The Condorcet winner, if there is one, is the one
candidate who can beat each other candidate in a two-way
race with that candidate.
The problem is that in complex elections, there may well
be a circular relationship in which A beats B, B beats C,
and C beats A. Most of the variations on Condorcet use
various means of resolving the tie. See
Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping
for details. Debian's variation is spelled out in the
constitution,
specifically, A.6.
Manoj Srivastava