Re: SPI violating bylaws and Debian constitution
In message <[🔎] 14833.48577.680584.767386@venge.net>, graydon hoare writes:
....
>but is not running a nameserver. you might want to remedy this
>situation before proceeding with the spi-inc.org web pages.
>
This is being taken care of at present and should be fixed in the next week
or so. There'll be some internic delay as well probably...
>not to sound too harsh, but is it not also prudent to ask whether SPI
>as a group addresses a cause which continues to need addressing?
>certainly free software projects are no longer in need of an
>"incubator" group (sourceforge handles this more effectively than SPI
>could ever hope to), the public is all too aware of the internet and
>computers in general, and the licensing shenanigans of a year ago seem
>largely to have died down. perhaps a revisiting of charter is in
>order?
>
I'm not sure I agree completely here. Let me take one issue at a time.
Free projects are not in need of computing resources any more as they were
before sourceforge came about. They are, however, still in need of an
organization that can handle donations and legal issues if required. This
is a hole that SPI is also designed to fill, and I think that it can do this.
The public is aware of the internet in general, but work could still be done
in developing countries. Try not to think too US specific... for example a
program where corporations donate everything from a 386 up to get a tax
break and these PCs are installed with Linux to be a cheap mail/web
interface and sent to developing countries. SPI can accept these donations
since its non-profit.
As far as licensing goes I agree with you in general, but some licenses that
OSI have declared open source do not meet the DFSG IIRC. This issue is
better addressed by an organization that individuals if it ever becomes a
concern.
Revisiting the charter is not an option since that is what the organization
is based on; we thought about this after the board changed last time, but it
is impossible to do; in essence you need to re-form the company etc. since
the non profit status and the company were approved as per that charter.
What exactly and how SPI does things, however, is open, and I think the
current charter leaves enough leeway to do what we want to.
>it seems to me that the most pressing issue now is heading off
>reactionary legislation to tax/censor/snoop/search/prosecute computer
>and internet related activity.
>
If someone is interested in working on this for SPI they are welcome to do
so. Considering everything that has gone on, including the MP3 and napster
issues, if people want to work on this under the umbrella of SPI, I
personally would not see a problem. Actions of this sort would have to be
approved by a board resolution, but tat should not be a problem either.
I hope I've addressed your questions. If you have any others, please let me
know.
Regards,
Nils.
--
Nils Lohner Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
E-Mail: lohner@spi-inc.org PO Box 273
Board of Directors <board@spi-inc.org> Tracy, Ca. 95378-0273, USA
Reply to: