On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 10:21:46AM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 08:45:08AM -0300, Jonatas L. Nogueira wrote:
> > This is a notice of the upcoming election for the SPI Board of
> > Directors. The Directors are the lifeblood of the organization and are
> > responsible for
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 02:02:49PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 01:46 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 01:32:21PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>On 11/17/2016 01:09 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Do we have of
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 02:02:49PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 01:46 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 01:32:21PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>On 11/17/2016 01:09 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Do we have of
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:32:15AM -0800, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 11:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On 11/17/2016 10:59 AM, Josh berkus wrote:
> >
> >> That's not relevant to why we need an admin. Nor has anyone suggested
> >> hiring a fundraiser.
> >>
> >> SPI is at this point a $5
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 01:32:21PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 01:09 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> >>Do we have officers who could spend more time on SPI if they were paid
> >>to do so?
> >
> >A NPO cannot pay officers and ex-officers wit
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:32:15AM -0800, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 11:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On 11/17/2016 10:59 AM, Josh berkus wrote:
> >
> >> That's not relevant to why we need an admin. Nor has anyone suggested
> >> hiring a fundraiser.
> >>
> >> SPI is at this point a $5
> On Nov 17, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
>
> 2) SPI is a big enough NPO that it really should have at least one paid
> administrative staff member. I believe that Drake previously proposed
> something of the sort?
In my experience, the job of such paid staff member quickly become to do
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 03:09:45PM -0700, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) would like to associate with SPI in order to
> accept donations (e.g. from Google Summer of Code). I'd like to propose
> the following resolutions.
>
> Any objections or comments?
Maybe one or two word
On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 03:34:12PM +0200, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> So, I guess there's a trade-off here. We can have really simple bylaws
> and give the board the ability to modify them, trusting that our nearly
> complete transparency of operations and the legal context in
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:09:03PM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> Pricing structure:
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-620
>
> * One-off sign-up fee 2 000 EUR (approx. 2 188 USD)
> * annual fee of 1 600 EUR (approx. 1750 USD)¹
> * per assignment fee of 50 EUR (approx. 54.71 USD).
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 09:38:18PM -0400, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> http://spi-inc.org/meetings/ currently says:
>
> > Resolutions adopted by the Board are posted to the spi-announce
> > mailing list and posted to the resolutions page.
>
> In reality, resolutions haven't been posted to spi-announ
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 02:06:19AM +1000, Robert Brockway wrote:
> The resolution below is submitted to the membership for discussion.
> I believe that Chakra fulfils the requirements for acceptance as an
> associated project.
Could you give some pointer to what Chakra is (or more to the point, wh
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:32AM +, TJ wrote:
> Early I accessed a secure Debian server [1] that presented a X509 certificate
> issued by an untrusted CA that turned out to be spi-inc.
>
> Visiting spi-inc.org [2] I hit another issue with an invalid certificate
> being presented causing Fir
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:42:15AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 01/15/2014 05:15 PM, Germán Arias wrote:
> > From one year ago, I'm searching a way to get donations to this
> > project. So, I would like know about the posibility to associate
> > FisicaLab to SPI. I live at Guatemala, so not sure
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:32:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Nevertheless your opinion is interesting to me [...]
> >
> > [explanations]
>
> Thanks for that.
If you find clarification of the license that are grounded in the actual
text and written by B. Kuhn or the FSF, please forward them
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 07:45:14PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Copyright arrangements for a web project"):
> > I am fine with the stated purpose of the AGPLv3, however I do not think the
> > actual implementation is compatible with free softwar
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:44:19PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> * Personally I'm an AGPLv3 proponent. The system ought to be suitable
> for AGPLv3 provided that its submodules are AGPLv3-compatible (and
> if they aren't, then we can probably write a licence exception).
> (The main program I'm
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 11:21:41AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> SPI members:
>
> The Software Freedom Conservancy is proposing to fund the efforts of a
> full-time software developer to create NPO accounting software which
> will be completely open source and free. SPI could really use such
> soft
SPI resolution 2012-05-31.ba.1
WHEREAS
1. liaison is written with three vowels in a row.
2. liaison is mispelled near-systematically on the SPI mailing lists by non
French speakers.
3. this is bound to irritate the small number of French speakers which are
subscribed
to the SPI mailing lis
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 01:49:20PM -0600, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> It is time for me to pass the reigns on this topic over to the Arch Linux
> Project Leader, Aaron Griffin, who should I tell him to contact so that Arch
> can become an associated project? The howto specifies that
> the liaison shoul
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 02:19:06PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes ("Re: Code of Conduct at events [and 1 more messages]"):
> > Additionally, I am uncertain that a code would have helped mitigate
> > this situation. I refuse to believe that the alleged behavior is
> > considered ac
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 05:00:47PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Indeed if I remember rightly, a few years ago a person was expelled
> from Debconf (and from Debian) as a result of their behaviour at
> Debconf. I wasn't there myself so I can't second-guess the decision
> of the conference organisers
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:27:48PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:53:19PM +0100, Markus Schulze wrote:
> > Hallo,
> >
> > in my opinion, the Schulze STV method is
> > the best multi-winner election method:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_STV
> >
> > See
Resolution 2009-04-01.ba.1: Liaison superseded
WHEREAS
1. "liaison" is a French word meaning a link with three (3) consecutive
vowels.
2. The mispelling "liason" does not exist in English, and is irritating to
French readers.
3. Some SPI officers are unable to spell "liaison" proper
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 04:57:52PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Based on the fact that I feel comfortable that we are on good accounting
> footing, and that the additional donations volume will not interfere with
> getting all of our accounting tasks done, I'm bringing this forward now
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 12:10:26PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> If you're opposed to the transfer participate in the email discussion.
> (I have a bunch of messages I need to reply to myself.)
Since you mention it, I am interested to know where this email discussion
is held and/or who is involved,
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 02:45:07PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 12:01:38PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It seems there have been a SPI IRC meeting last Tuesday but no remainder
> > > was sent t
Dear SPI board,
It seems there have been a SPI IRC meeting last Tuesday but no remainder
was sent to spi-announce.
Am I correct ?
In that case, are the IRC logs available ?
Thanks in advance,
Bill.
___
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-i
28 matches
Mail list logo
