Jimmy Kaplowitz writes ("Re: Resolution 2019-05-25.jrk.1: Removing Jenkins as
associated project"):
> A few other comments in response to some of Ian's concerns:
Thanks. Much of this is reassuring.
However:
> As Kohsuke said, the resolution already allows for this possibility. We
> worded the
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:15:53PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>...
> But the final arrangements for the transfer, when they are known,
> should be put to the board for a confirmatory vote. At that point we
> will know exactly what the proposed transferee is and the SPI board
> (and indeed the membe
Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Resolution 2019-05-25.jrk.1: Removing Jenkins as
associated project"):
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:15:53PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > While it may be lawful for SPI to transfer charitable assets to
> > another charity which spends those charitable funds on
> > legally-
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:15:53PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I do not think it is appropriate for the resolution to authorise a
> transfer without clearly stating what organisation the transfer is to.
> This is not a situation where a resolution that is intentionally vague
> is appropriate.
>
>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 05:06:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Resolution 2019-05-25.jrk.1: Removing Jenkins as
> associated project"):
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 12:15:53PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > While it may be lawful for SPI to transfer charitable assets to
>
