Re: All DPL Candidates: www.debian.org licensing?
On 12/03/08 at 09:57 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > > Questions about that issue:
> > > > 1) You seem to think that delegating someone now would be useful. Why?
> > >
> > > I think we should ask a debian-tied lawyer before doing a lot of unfun
> > > work which may turn out to be useless if we get it wrong. I'm not
> > > confident that we can do this through SPI unless the DPL or a delegate
> > > asks, because some SPI members seem to oppose it without that. Even
> > > so, I think SPI is the best route for the project to ask a lawyer.
> >
> > I agree, but why are you asking for a delegation (constitution 5.1.1)
> > instead of simply asking the DPL to tell SPI that X is going to be the
> > interface between -www@ and SPI on that issue.
>
> Firstly, I expect this could take longer than one DPL and it's the
> sort of task that seems to get lost in handovers.
>
> Secondly, delegation should make X's task clear to both this project
> and SPI in a robust way and seemed the most obvious to me. How does
> the constitution give the DPL a power to tell SPI that X is going to
> be the interface, except by delegating some aspect of the DPL's power
> under 5.1.10?
5.1.10 answers the money problem. I don't think it answers the
"authority" problem.
Anyway, I'm not opposed to a formal delegation. I'm just not convinced
(yet) that it's required.
> > Ultimately, after legal advice is seeked, it's still -www@ who is going
> > to decide, no?
>
> Maybe. If there's really no consensus, maybe all developers should
> be asked to throw in their two-penn'orth in a GR. Not great, but one
> of the few resolution tools the project has.
ACK.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: