[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5)

Oliver Elphick writes ("Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5) "):
> I suggest certain changes between the double lines; lines beginning `X ='
> are to be deleted and replaced:

Thanks a lot.  (Your notation was very difficult, btw.  You might like
to look into using `diff -u'.)

I have incorporated your changes into 0.6.1, which is now available at:
(I have not made these changes formal).

> [Not relevant to your question:] The last clause of this sentence is unclear
> in its effect.  It appears to mean that someone (unspecified) may appeal
> to SPI to make a decision for Debian over the heads of all other authority
> specified in the rest of this constitution. I suggest that it would be 
> better to omit this.

It now says explicitly that it's the constitution which refers to SPI
as a decision body of last resort.

> My changes are intended to remove the appearance of control that is
> equivalent to ownership.  If SPI is a separate legal person, Debian
> can have no legal authority which is not granted by SPI's own
> constitution.  Therefore it is wrong for this constitution to assert
> any such authority.


> I therefore changed clause 9.2 to make it clear that SPI have made
> certain undertakings. [I hope that this is actually the case?]

They haven't yet, but mainly because we haven't finalised this.

> It would be as well to get a NY state lawyer/accountant to take a
> look as well.

The best thing to do is probably to have Tim Sailer's friendly laywers
look over it when we're close to taking a vote, and then if they like
it the SPI board can agree to it.  I think there's not much doubt that
the SPI board will agree.

> A highly relevant question here is, who has authority over SPI to make
> them keep these undertakings if they were to break them?  I imagine that
> Debian's officers could do so, but the grounds would be breach of trust
> (an external authority) or of SPI's own rules.  In neither case could this
> constitution be cited as an authority over SPI.

That seems reasonable.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: