Hi.
Ian Jackson wrote:
> DRAFT RESOLUTION 2008-12-19.iwj.1
> [...]
I second this.
Bye, Mike
___
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
Joshua D. Drake writes ("Re: Member communications II"):
> What is the problem we are trying to solve?
> The board's continual failures in communication and following protocol.
Right.
> How does this motion address the problem any more than the other motions
> that have already been passed?
It m
On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 14:27 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > With all due respect this seems like a motion for the sake of having a
> > motion.
>
> It is a motion for the sake of the board's recent failures to fulfill
> member's expectations, I think.
>
I am not argu
Joshua D. Drake writes ("Re: Member communications II"):
> On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 09:24 +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > DRAFT RESOLUTION 2008-12-19.iwj.1
...
> With all due respect this seems like a motion for the sake of having a
> motion.
I would expect that if the Board passe
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> With all due respect this seems like a motion for the sake of having a
> motion.
It is a motion for the sake of the board's recent failures to fulfill
member's expectations, I think.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org/
"La v
On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 09:24 +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > DRAFT RESOLUTION 2008-12-19.iwj.1
>
> I second this and ask other SPI members (contributing or
> non-contributing - both seem to be fine for this) to second it as
> stated in article five of http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008, MJ Ray wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > DRAFT RESOLUTION 2008-12-19.iwj.1
>
> I second this and ask other SPI members (contributing or
> non-contributing - both seem to be fine for this) to second it as
> stated in article five of http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/by-laws
>
>
Ian Jackson wrote:
> DRAFT RESOLUTION 2008-12-19.iwj.1
I second this and ask other SPI members (contributing or
non-contributing - both seem to be fine for this) to second it as
stated in article five of http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/by-laws
I humbly suggest removing
[4.]
> (iv) In the c
