On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 11:32:19AM -0500, Nils Lohner wrote: > Yeah, but I figured a definition can't hurt, might help get rid of some > confusion sometime.
Agree. > Hmmm... that would make a lot of things tougher, hosting of a mailing > list, offering some FTP space, at this point you're tying SPI and the > projects down in terms of their reactivity. I'd suggest not putting this, > but rather something along the lines of 'within the SPI goals' to leave it > general. Plus you said donated- if equipment is donated it's SPI's and > the donor has no say, if it's a service/loan, then that could apply. But > I'd still rather leave his resolution general and ask the donor to put > that clause into the service agreement at the start of the loan- makes > thing easier on all parties I think. That is exactly what I am doing. Just like the Debian packaging policies tie down a developer's "reactivity". Donating services is the only thing that SPI does. The concept that this should be completely free-form and not depend on making a project "officially SPI endorsed" is a bit odd. > Not sure I agree with this... lots of little projects can use a mailing > list, a little FTP space, etc. but don't necessarily need to become SPI > affiliated. Remember, affiliation means we manage money, equipment etc. > for them. I think it's a good idea if the bigger ones become affiliated, > but smaller ones I would like exempt from this requirement. SPI's mission is to give aid and assistance. If SPI gives aid and assistance to a project then it is "SPI associated". Perhaps we can have different levels of affiliation that provide different levels of service. E -- ___________________________________________________________________ Ean Schuessler As above Novare International Inc. so below --- Some or all of the above signature may be a joke
