On 13 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong uttered the following:
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See
>> + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a
>> + electronic mailing list designated by theProject Leader's
>> + Delegate(s), which is accessible to all developers.
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I suggest s/Project Leader's Delegate(s)/Project Leader or their
> Delegate(s)/ throughout the document. [I'll ignore what look to be
> strange spacing errors. ;-)]
>
>> 9.1. Authority
>>
>> + 3. Debian Developers are not agents or employees of such
>> + organizations holding assets in trust for Debian, or of
>> each
>> + other or of persons in authority in the Debian Project. A
>> + person acting as a Developer does so as an individual, on
>> + their own behalf.
>
> I don't really understand this paragraph; are we attempting to say
> that these organizations can't have Debian Developer's as agents or
> employees? Or are we trying to say that the organization can't
> require a Developer to influence the process as a function of their
> agenecy or employment?
This is just an update of the wording already there, you
know. I think the intent is that not all DD's are automatically
considered agents or employees, etc. I think I have wording in there
somewhere that the organization may employ or give other powers to
individual DD's if they want, but they are not compelled to do so
>> 9.2. Management of property for purposes related to Debian
>>
>> + Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
>> + donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a
>> set
>
> Consider s/for/to/
Any donation {to the organization under consideration} for the
Debian project ...
>
>> + of organizations designated by the Project leader (or a delegate)
>> + to be authorized to handle such things in name of the Debian
>> + project. Such authorization, or its withdrawal, and annual reports
>> + of activities by such organizations on behalf of Debian must be
>> + published by announcement on a publicly-readable electronic
>> + mailing list designated by the Project Leader's Delegate(s); any
>> + Developer may post there.
>
> I'd also suggest requiring authorization of an organization to
> handle money in the name of Debian be announced publicly before its
> authorization, say two weeks or so. [This allows sufficient time for
> §4.2.2 to place a decision on hold, and really shouldn't cause a
> problem.] I don't support this for the amendment to add 4.2.6 above,
> because I can forsee a decision to direct an organization to
> disburse funds needing to occur quickly. [This would also allow the
> developers to verify that the organization is in a position to
> undertake the obligations necessary to handle Debian assests, such
> as you mention the SPI doing below.]
Well, I am not sure. §4.2.2.2 means that such a decision by
the DPL can be immediately put on hold, well before any funds are
committed. I don't see how delaying decisions to authorize or
unauthorize organizations by two weeks really helps in the common
case; since just 10 developers can put a decision on hold.
>> Should we move the bit about SPI to an external no-foundation
>> document? I would be open to that, but it would be nice if I see
>> some indication other people agree with aj and me.
>
> As far as the obligations that SPI has undertaken? It would probably
> be just as well to link to the list of organizations that are
> currently capable of handling assets for Debian and the list of
> promises they have made in order to do so. [I think even deleting
> the list of obligations of SPI and placing that elsewhere may be
> useful because it's not particularly germane to the constitution.]
Ok, that is three people.
manoj
--
You're always thinking you're gonna be the one that makes 'em act
different. Woody Allen, "Manhattan"
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
