On 10 Jun 2006, Goswin von Brederlow told this:
> Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
>> Perhaps a formulation like
>> Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property,
>> any monetary donations for the Debian Project must be made
>> to an organization that has been vetted by the DPL to be
>> allowed to handle such things in name of the Debian
>> project, where no more than one such organization shall be
>> vetted per country.
>> Any property in hardware, trademarks, or in copyright will
>> be handled by SPI, which is our legal umbrella organization
>> in the U.S.
> This should refer to another text listing the vetted organizations.
> One outside the constitution so it can be changed as needed.
Why? The constitution should not decide on the medium the
companies that hold assets for Debian should be stored in; that
should be up to the DPL's and their deligates. There is no need to
build such micromanagement into the constitutions; so just saying
that the companies designated (as opposed to vetted) by the project
leader would be authorized to do so without specifying where the list
f current companies so authorized is kept is better.
What you don't know can hurt you, only you won't know it.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C