On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 03:02:01PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > As I said on debian-project(?) I obviously agree with those > statements.
To be a little more clearer than last time; I consider the "project representative" position to be responsible for communicating that project's decisions to SPI, and communicating anything relevant from SPI back to the project. I think having the DPL be Debian's representative is simple and expedient and that's about it. If Debian sees it as a potential conflict of interest, it's easily changed, but I think it'd be a lot of hassle for no benefit. > If it would be helpful to Debian, I will draft a resolution in the > now-standard format describing our current understanding of our > relationship with Debian. > > AJ, do you think that would be helpful ? I think this is mostly something that would be helpful for MJ, rather than Debian as a whole; but I'd certainly expect SPI to have something in its books making it official how Debian's decisions are communicated to SPI. Cheers, aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
