Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 07:56:03AM +0200, Martin Wuertele wrote: * Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-07-21 03:39]: On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:12:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are currently members of SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. This paragraph was marked as unchanged in your diff, however it was actually changed below: SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are eligible for contributing membership in SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. and should be clearly marked as part of the changes. Seconded, if you approve this editorial change to the GR. :) Same here, seconded in that case. Seconded (again) if vorlon's suggestion is approved by Manoj. Best Regards, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar -- http://v7w.com/anibal signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
On Friday 21 July 2006 03:12, Manoj Srivastava wrote: 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: -6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about - property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.1.) 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: +6. Together with the Project Leader make decisions about + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a + electronic mailing list designated by the Project Leader + or their Delegate(s), which is accessible to all developers. - 5. Project Leader 5.1. Powers The Project Leader may: - 10. Together with SPI, make decisions affecting property held in trust - for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.) = == 5. Project Leader 5.1. Powers The Project Leader may: + 10. In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a + publicly-readable electronic mailing list designated by the + Project Leader's Delegate(s); any Developer may post there. - -- -9. Software in the Public Interest SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are currently members of SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. - 9.1. Authority - -1. SPI has no authority regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical - decisions, except that no decision by Debian with respect to any - property held by SPI shall require SPI to act outside its legal - authority, and that Debian's constitution may occasionally use SPI - as a decision body of last resort. -2. Debian claims no authority over SPI other than that over the use - of certain of SPI's property, as described below, though Debian - Developers may be granted authority within SPI by SPI's rules. -3. Debian Developers are not agents or employees of SPI, 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. - 9.2. Management of property for purposes related to Debian - Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any donations - for the Debian Project must be made to SPI, which manages such - affairs. SPI have made the following undertakings: 1. SPI will hold money, trademarks and other tangible and intangible property and manage other affairs for purposes related to Debian. 2. Such property will be accounted for separately and held in trust for those purposes, decided on by Debian and SPI according to this section. 3. SPI will not dispose of or use property held in trust for Debian without approval from Debian, which may be granted by the Project Leader or by General Resolution of the Developers. 4. SPI will consider using or disposing of property held in trust for Debian when asked to do so by the Project Leader. 5. SPI will use or dispose of property held in trust for Debian when asked to do so by a General Resolution of the Developers, provided that this is compatible with SPI's legal authority. 6. SPI will notify the Developers by electronic mail to a Debian Project mailing list when it uses or disposes of property held in trust for Debian. +9. Assets held in trust for Debian + Debian has no legal presence in any country worldwide, and as such + cannot maintain any money or other property. Therefore, property will + have to be maintained by any of a number of organizations as detailed in + §9.2 + + Traditionally, SPI was the sole organization authorized to hold + property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in + the U.S. to hold money in trust there. SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are eligible for contributing membership in SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. + 9.1
Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 12:24:20PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: PS: Is it true that Ubuntu things about supplying a 3 year offer for source under 3b so derivates of ubuntu can go sourcelss? A nice idea, to be sure, but it doesn't seem particularly helpful, unless the derivative isn't modifying anything GPL-covered (possible, I suppose, but unlikely), since the moment you modify something you don't have a written offer from someone for that source code, and can't use 3c any more. More likely, Ubuntu is going to let people who use the Soyuz (I think that's the one) part of Launchpad to define their own custom distros provide the source alongside the binaries, thus letting everyone go the 3a route (as long as you sign your sanity away by agreeing to use Launchpad for ever more). - Matt Most of the time you change 1% and keep the remaining 99% of the dvd as is (unless you rebuild every source package like ubuntu does). A derivative can then just include that 1% source and the written offer. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Demande de renseignement
Bonjour,je suis Monsieur KONAN ELVIS Directeur deCONTACT TRANS Distribution basée en Abidjan - Cote d'Ivoire.Je viens par ce message prendre contact avec vous dans le but d'effectuer une commandeau sein de votre établissement, suite aux différents achats faits à Dubaï et Bankok qui n'ont produits que des articles défaillants trois mois après réception de ceux-ci.Etant donner l'importance et la rapidité des demandes,je voudrais bien savoir si vous disposer d'un TPE (Terminal de Prelevement Electronique) au sein de votre structure, pour faciliter le paiement par carte bancaire par habitude aux règlements denosfactures a distance (vpc).Aussi, veuillez me signifier pareillement si vous accepter les paiement par virements bancaires (virements irrévocables et confirmés). Nous travaillons avec les maisons d'expéditions express comme DHL, UPS, FEDEX et le Fret Aérien Normal. En attente de votre message retour, je vous prie de bien vouloir recevoir mes salutations distinguées.E. B. DistributionDirecteurKONAN ELVISmaracory- Rue de la Paix05 B.P. 402 Abidjan 05Tel.:+225.07.296.946Fax:+225.21.264.800 Découvrez un nouveau moyen de poser toutes vos questions quelque soit le sujet ! Yahoo! Questions/Réponses pour partager vos connaissances, vos opinions et vos expériences. Cliquez ici.
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Hi Manoj! You wrote: + Traditionally, SPI was the sole organization authorized to hold + property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in + the U.S. to hold money in trust there. I'm wondering about this part. It seems to me like just a historic overview of the old situation, which IMO does not belong in the constitution. SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are eligible for contributing membership in SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. I don't think it makes sense that the Debian constitution determines who can become a member of SPI. That is something that should be (and probably is) described in SPI's bylaws. -- Kind regards, ++ | Bas Zoetekouw | GPG key: 0644fab7 | || Fingerprint: c1f5 f24c d514 3fec 8bf6 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] | a2b1 2bae e41f 0644 fab7 | ++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at this time. I suggested rewording this condition-less conditional phrase: + It would be preferable if the organizations holding assets in + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of + such assets, as an example: as: + It is preferred that the organizations holding assests in + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of + such assets, as an example: or more normally and concisely: + Organizations holding assets in trust for Debian should undertake + obligations for the handling of such assets, similar to this: Please will you accept one of those amendments? - -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEwKPdmUY5euFC5vQRAvuEAJ0bAouGP9F7t8pgmPXYKWDBIuGPTgCgkqlo Em41OzlxqDkHRI2Cp0rwY3k= =WTlX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
MJ Ray wrote: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at this time. I suggested rewording this condition-less conditional phrase: + It would be preferable if the organizations holding assets in + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of + such assets, as an example: as: + It is preferred that the organizations holding assests in + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of + such assets, as an example: or more normally and concisely: + Organizations holding assets in trust for Debian should undertake + obligations for the handling of such assets, similar to this: Please will you accept one of those amendments? You're right to correct the original, but I don't think you've nailed it yet. If there's a should then obligation is clearly the wrong word to go with it. And you don't undertake an obligation -- you meet an obligation, or undertake to meet it. So maybe: Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian will be required to meet certain obligations in their handling of such assets... or It is preferred that organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should comply with certain conditions regarding their handling of such assets... or similar. Cheers, Nick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:12:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: In order to bring the constitution in line with current needs and practices of handling assets globally, and allowing the projet to add and remove partner organizations from the set of organizations currently authorized to hold assets for Debian, I would like to propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at this time. I'd like to ask that we keep the discussion period for this open until the SPI elections are completed and the new board has an opportunity to comment. So if this proposal receives enough seconds to go to a vote, please consider this an extension of the discussion period of up to a week under 4.2.4 to ensure it doesn't end before Aug 7th (which is just under three weeks from now, and gives the new board a week after electing their officers to comment). Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Nick Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MJ Ray wrote: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] + It would be preferable if the organizations holding assets in + trust for Debian undertake certain obligations for the handling of + such assets, as an example: [...] You're right to correct the original, but I don't think you've nailed it yet. If there's a should then obligation is clearly the wrong word to go with it. And you don't undertake an obligation -- you meet an obligation, or undertake to meet it. Agreed. I don't think obligation in the original meant a MUST or a will, but something more like offering certain undertakings, but I could be wrong. How about: Organizations holding assets in trust for Debian should make certain promises about their handling of such assets... or It is preferred that organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should comply with certain conditions regarding their handling of such assets... ? Thanks for the phrasing help, -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Manoj Srivastava writes (Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project): In order to bring the constitution in line with current needs and practices of handling assets globally, and allowing the projet to add and remove partner organizations from the set of organizations currently authorized to hold assets for Debian, I would like to propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at this time. I agree with the sense and letter but have a few factual, grammar and other minor corrections, which I'd like to formally propose as amendments. I'd appreciate it if you'd accept them. I propose each change as a separate amendment so you may accept some or all of them; they're numbered 1 to 14, below. I hereby also second the proposed resolution as is, even if you don't accept my amendments. 1. Replace all occurrences of `organization' (and derivative words) with `organisation', so as to maintain consistent spelling. 2. Change wording from `legal presence' to `legal entity': + Debian has no legal presence in any country worldwide, and as such Debian is not a legal entity (in any country in the world), and as such Rationale: Having a `legal presence' is not the same as being a `legal entity'; legal entities may exist but not have a presence in a particular country. 3. Change `maintain' to `own': 4. Change `Therefore, property...' to present tense: + cannot maintain any money or other property. Therefore, property will cannot own any money or ... ... Therefore, property for use for Debian Rationale for 3.: Debian cannot own things; ownership is a legal concept. It can maintain them; maintaining things is how you deal with them in the real world. (Money does not need to be `maintained'.) Rationale for 4.: We should use the present tense, not the future tense, even though this amendment is currently a draft. + have to be maintained by any of a number of organizations as detailed in has to be owned by any of... Part of my amendment 3. 5. Insert a paragraph break: 6. Mark this whole section 9.2 as non-normative: + §9.2 + + Traditionally, SPI was the sole organization authorized to hold + property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in + the U.S. to hold money in trust there. -- insert paragraph break -- SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's Developers are eligible for contributing membership in SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. Rationale for 6.: most of this is just factual information; the contributing membership status is determined by SPI so is also informational. 7. Add a comma: + 9.1 Relationship with Associated Organizations + + 1. Debian Developers do not become agents or employees of +organizations holding assets in trust for Debian, or of +each other, or of persons in authority in the Debian Project ...in the Debian Project, +solely by the virtue of being Debian Developers. A person Rationale: this makes it clearer that the `solely by virtue of' applies to `do not become agents' rather than `persons in authority'. 8. Apostrophe correction: + authority within such an organization, subject to the + organizations decision and rules. organisation's decision and rules. (My amendment 1, organisation, also applies.) 9. Remove comma-splice: + Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any Debian has no authority to hold money or property. Any Rationale: this fixes the grammar and breaks up an excessively long sentence. 10. Replace `such things': 11. Replace `in name of' and `on behalf of': 12. Capitalise `Project Leader' and Delegate: + donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a set + of organizations designated by the Project leader (or a delegate) of organisations designated by the Project Leader (or a Delegate) + to be authorized to handle such things in name of the Debian ... to handle assets to be used for the Debian Rationale for 10.: `Such things' is vague; we should say exactly what we mean. Rationale for 11.: `In name of' is bad grammar. `In the name of' and `on behalf of (see below) would be wrong because it might imply some kind of legal existence for Debian. What we should talk about is the assets' purpose. 12. Capitalise `Project': + project. Such authorization, or its withdrawal, and annual reports Project. ... 11 again: + of activities by such organizations on behalf of Debian must be of Debian-related activities by such
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Ian Jackson writes (Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project): they're numbered 1 to 14, below. I mean 1 to 15, sorry. I split one of them up during editing :-). Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:18:44 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hi Manoj! You wrote: + Traditionally, SPI was the sole organization authorized to hold + property and monies for the Debian Project. SPI was created in + the U.S. to hold money in trust there. I'm wondering about this part. It seems to me like just a historic overview of the old situation, which IMO does not belong in the constitution. This is a lead in for all the material that the constitution has about the SPI, and as you have discerned, as well as being what the wording suggests, a historical background that explains the special place for SPI in the rest of the section. Debian's Developers are eligible for contributing membership in SPI by virtue of their status as Developers. I don't think it makes sense that the Debian constitution determines who can become a member of SPI. That is something that should be (and probably is) described in SPI's bylaws. This is true. There seems no reason to mention this in the constitution, since an action by the SPI board can change that, and the constitution amendment would be required to marry the constitution with reality. What would the seconders feel about deleting this sentence from the proposed draft? manoj -- Leave bigotry in your quarters; there's no room for it on the bridge. Kirk, Balance of Terror, stardate 1709.2 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]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Hello Manoj, * Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-07-21 09:37]: [...] 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: +6. Together with the Project Leader make decisions about ^^ One space too much :) Kind regards Nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://nion.modprobe.de/blog/ Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons - gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys! pgp7z2IXOvhir.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
MJ Ray writes (Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project): Please will you accept one of those amendments? My proposed amendments 13, 14 and 15 in my message [EMAIL PROTECTED] change this text to: Organisations holding assets in trust for Debian should undertake reasonable obligations for the handling of such assets. As an example of best practice at the time of writing, SPI have made the following undertakings: Needless to say I think this is the best wording. The use of `should' (whose meaning is spelled out in appendix B) is helpful, I think. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
quote who=Ian Jackson date=Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 03:53:19PM +0100 I agree with the sense and letter but have a few factual, grammar and other minor corrections, which I'd like to formally propose as amendments. I'd appreciate it if you'd accept them. I propose each change as a separate amendment so you may accept some or all of them; they're numbered 1 to 14, below. I hereby also second the proposed resolution as is, even if you don't accept my amendments. I'll also second the resolution as is. I also support Ian's suggestions although I don't care too much about most of the grammar, spelling, or comma changes. Several of the other changes seem to be useful clarifications. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mako.cc/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
Hi, Here is the latest draft of the proposal. I have accepted most of the suggestions offered on the mailing lists; I think they have been mostly editorial, with cleanup of the language, and typographical changes, with no substantive differences from the last draft. However, given my track record WRT editorial changes to foundation documents, people ought to be examining this draft _before_ the vote rather than afterwards :) At last count, the following had sconded the previous draft, I hope there is no problem with the changes made with this version. 1) Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2) Martin Wuertele [EMAIL PROTECTED] (unsigned message) 3) Aníbal Monsalve Salazar [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4) Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (unsigned message) 5) Benj. Mako Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6) Adrian von Bidder [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7) Alexander Zangerl [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key expired manoj 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: -6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about - property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.1.) 4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election 4.1. Powers Together, the Developers may: +6. Together with the Project Leader make decisions about + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a + electronic mailing list designated by the Project Leader + or their Delegate(s), which is accessible to all developers. - 5. Project Leader 5.1. Powers The Project Leader may: - 10. Together with SPI, make decisions affecting property held in trust - for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.) === 5. Project Leader 5.1. Powers The Project Leader may: + 10. In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See + §9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a + publicly-readable electronic mailing list designated by the + Project Leader's Delegate(s); any Developer may post there. --- -9. Software in the Public Interest SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. Debian -is grateful for the legal support framework offered by SPI. Debian's - Developers are currently members of SPI by virtue of their status as - Developers. - 9.1. Authority - -1. SPI has no authority regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical - decisions, except that no decision by Debian with respect to any - property held by SPI shall require SPI to act outside its legal - authority, and that Debian's constitution may occasionally use SPI - as a decision body of last resort. -2. Debian claims no authority over SPI other than that over the use - of certain of SPI's property, as described below, though Debian - Developers may be granted authority within SPI by SPI's rules. -3. Debian Developers are not agents or employees of SPI, 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. - 9.2. Management of property for purposes related to Debian - Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any donations - for the Debian Project must be made to SPI, which manages such - affairs. SPI have made the following undertakings: 1. SPI will hold money, trademarks and other tangible and intangible property and manage other affairs for purposes related to Debian. 2. Such property will be accounted for separately and held in trust for those purposes, decided on by Debian and SPI according to this section. 3. SPI will not dispose of or use property held in trust for Debian without approval from Debian, which may be granted by the Project Leader or by General Resolution of the Developers. 4. SPI will consider using or disposing of property held in trust for Debian when asked to do so by the Project Leader. 5. SPI will use or dispose of property held in trust for Debian when asked to do so by a General Resolution of the Developers, provided that this is compatible with SPI's legal authority. 6. SPI will notify the Developers by electronic mail to a Debian
Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:21:56 +1000, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au said: On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:12:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: In order to bring the constitution in line with current needs and practices of handling assets globally, and allowing the projet to add and remove partner organizations from the set of organizations currently authorized to hold assets for Debian, I would like to propose the following amendment to the Debian constitution. This had been discussed at length last month, and suggestions and discussion have died down. I would like to seek seconds for this proposal at this time. I'd like to ask that we keep the discussion period for this open until the SPI elections are completed and the new board has an opportunity to comment. So if this proposal receives enough seconds to go to a vote, please consider this an extension of the discussion period of up to a week under 4.2.4 to ensure it doesn't end before Aug 7th (which is just under three weeks from now, and gives the new board a week after electing their officers to comment). While I have no interest in rushing this proposal to a vote, and would like for us to have ample time to consider all angles and options, I should also note that the SPI board has no say in Debian's technical or nontechnical decisions, including our foundation documents. So current and prospective members of SPI's board may voice their opinions on this mailing list (as may anyone else, for that matter, since list posting is wide open), I see no reason to wait until SPI's board has made an official statement (since that has no bearing, etc). Is there something I am missing about why a Debian GR should wait until the SPI board has time to deliberate on it and tell us the results of their reflections? manoj perfectly happy not to have to work on a new vote till after labour day -- All those moments will be lost, in time, like tears in rain. Time to Die. Roy Batty, in Blade Runner 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]
