On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 09:01:05AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 18:22:08 +1000, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
said:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:46:54AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Yet another draft. There are major changes in this version, so I
think we'll
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 18:22:08 +1000, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au said:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:46:54AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Yet another draft. There are major changes in this version, so I
think we'll need to have people who seconded re-second the version
that comes out
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:46:54AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Yet another draft. There are major changes in this version, so
I think we'll need to have people who seconded re-second the version
that comes out of this discussion.
This has gone for about a week and a half without
2nd'd, also with Don's amendments.
Note that the 'in consultation' bit is still in - it could be still clearer
that the DPL may on his own take the decisions. But it's improved over the
prev. version.
cheers
-- vbi
On Tuesday 22 August 2006 18:46, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[-project readers, we've been discussing how to audit various Debian
assets around the world on -vote]
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
I suspect getting Europe done first, then SPI in October, then getting
around to all the other groups (Linux Australia, Debian Japan, various
Hi,
Yet another draft. There are major changes in this version, so
I think we'll need to have people who seconded re-second the version
that comes out of this discussion.
Changes:
+ Clarify developer powers to indicate that they can make as well as
override delegate
I second this amendment with (or without) the minor corrections
suggested below.
Don Armstrong
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Content-Description: draft GR
4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or
On Friday 11 August 2006 05:43, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 09:00:23PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
[...] I'd interpret the section to allow the DPL to include this
publication as a 'btw, we bought some disks for ...' sidenote in his
monthly/bits/for those who care
On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 23:47 -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
That is true. However this ammendment substancially changes the section
that talks about SPI, so it would be reasonable to have SPI's board look at
it if they so desire.
At best they could find some text that ought to be tweeked, and at
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 11:04:47AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Yes, Debian does have a role to play when SPI is deciding whether to
(for example) support voting software. The actual decision will of
course be taken by SPI via SPI's channels, but Debian is entitled to
fully
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 04:52:07AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Debian developers are given automatic status as contributing members in
SPI, and I know two board members have explicitly encouraged people
to be involved in SPI recently:
Hello,
On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 11:36:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
You, Sir, are an ass.
I admit that this is a non-technical topic related to the Debian
project, but still it does not seem to be a useful contribution to
the debian-project list.
Could this discussion maybe be
On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 11:47:12PM -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 11:56:59 +0200, Bernhard R Link [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
A GR should wait - within reasonable time - until developers can
have the
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:16:43PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
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.
While I have no interest in rushing this proposal to a vote,
* Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060722 01:20]:
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
On Friday 21 July 2006 17:54, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:18:44 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
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
On Saturday 22 July 2006 01:05, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Here is the latest draft of the proposal. [...]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Seconded.
Nitpicking:
move this space character
+6. Together with the Project Leader make decisions about
quote who=Manoj Srivastava date=Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:05:38PM -0500
At last count, the following had sconded the previous draft, I hope
there is no problem with the changes made with this version.
I have no problem with these changes.
Regards,
Mako
--
Benjamin Mako Hill
[EMAIL
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
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
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
-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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
Hi,
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
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
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:12:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
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
* 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
38 matches
Mail list logo
