On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 08:46:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > =========================================================================== > 5. Project Leader > 5.1. Powers > The Project Leader may: > + 10. In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting > + property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See > + ?9.). Such decisions are made by announcement on a > + publicly-readable electronic mailing list designated by the > + Project Leader's Delegate(s); any Developer may post there. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do we really want to make it impossible to authorise funds by going through -private should we need to? > ======================================================================== > +9. Property and Monies held in trust for Debian Assets? That also covers trademarks and copyrights then, and contractual agreements with other organisations for that matter. > SPI and Debian are separate organisations who share some goals. If we're going to be properly separate organisations, why not move this to a separate document? > 9.2. Management of property for purposes related to Debian > > + Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, I think it'd be good to drop the "Since" -- we /could/ hold assets as Debian, but we (consitutionally) choose not to, and instead have others hold assets in trust for us. > + any > + donations for the Debian Project must be made to any one of a set s/donations/contributions/ ? s/for/intended to benefit/ ? > + of organizations designated by the Project leader or a delegate "L"eader? Should the possibility of delegation just be left implied? > + to be authorized to handle such things in name of the Debian > + project. Such authorization, or its withdrawal, and annual reports > + of activities by such organizations on behalf of Debian must be > + published by announcement on a publicly-readable electronic > + mailing list designated by the Project Leader's Delegate(s); any > + Developer may post there. Why the "any Developer may post there" restriction? That would disallow -devel-announce, eg, if a developer had been banned from posting to it. Cheers, aj, no DPL hat
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature