On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 04:06:47PM +0200, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
> We discussed the option to use the debian.ch association for DC13 and
> the option to create a new association.
<snip>
> Any comments?
Yep, on the specific point of "reusing" debian.ch vs establishing a new
association. I've read the detailed argument of that choice but, to be
fair, I don't understand from it why you prefer creating a new
association.
Some background on how that part of DebConf organization has happened in
the past few years, from my (limited) POV as DPL:
1) if we already have a Debian trusted organization where DebConf
happens -> great, nothing special to do in terms of money dealing
2) if not -> crap, we need to find /another/ local entity to deal with
money and sign a deal with them, stating we trust them and they'll
hold Debian money for the duration of DebConf
(2) can be done and has been done in the past, but the advantage of not
having to do that are nice to have. I think that this is an additional
disadvantage of the option "create a new orga" that should be taken into
account.
A few other comments on your arguments:
- you mentioned, in the option "reusing debian.ch", the need of changing
current bylaws. Can you explain why that would be needed? Can't we
simply rely on debian.ch without changing the bylaws? I have never
read debian.ch bylaws, but organizing DebConf is pretty much within
the realm of "Debian activities" that most Debian related
organizations pursue
- I understand from your report that debian.ch does not have tax
exemption status yet. This would clearly be a blocker in relying on
debian.ch for DebConf13 money dealing. But if a Swiss organization has
to get tax exemption status anyhow, "enjoying" the bureaucratic
overhead of obtaining it, then it would be better to have debian.ch be
that organization. That way the status could remain past DebConf13 and
we can advertise debian.ch as one of the Debian trusted organization
one could donate to, enjoying tax benefits.
From the way you put it, going debian.ch seems a better option for
Debian, at least in the long run. And in the short run, the idea of
having you people going through quite a bit of bureaucratic overhead,
when you already have a local Debian-related organization, doesn't seem
particularly useful.
Maybe there are other arguments in favor of the "new organization"
option that I'm missing?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature