Hi Ian -
The roles and decision making powers of the SPI project liaison are consistent
with those vested already in the OBF President through the OBF's bylaws as far
as OBF assets and their use are concerned. So, I think it's OK to label the OBF
president the "authoritative decision maker" for the kinds of decisions
required of an SPI project liaison, at least to the extent that I have read
about and understand them. It doesn't matter here, I think, whether in a
concrete case the OBF President would need to follow certain OBF procedures
(such as call a OBF Board meeting) before s/he can render or communicate the
decision requested by SPI, so long as there is a process for this laid down
(which it is).
-hilmar
On Oct 1, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes ("OBF as associated project, formal resolution"):
>> 4. Hilmar Lapp is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker
>> and SPI liaison for TideSDK. Future liaisons will be the same person
>> who is president of the OBF at that time, elected according to the
>> bylaws at: http://www.open-bio.org/wiki/File:OBF-Bylaws.pdf
>
> Is Hilmar Lapp really the autocrat for this project ? Or should we
> have something more like the text we have for Debian ? Or something
> in between ?
>
> Ian.
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
--
===========================================================
: Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- hlapp at drycafe dot net :
===========================================================
_______________________________________________
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
