Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Re: [steering-discuss] Updated draft of the Community Bylaws


Hello Drew,

Well spoken. And with that, I declare the Community Bylaws adopted
(provided nobody from the SC punches me in the face right away)...

Huzzah!
Charles.


Le Mon, 06 Dec 2010 06:25:16 -0500,
drew <drew@baseanswers.com> a écrit :

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 11:08 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Last call: are we good on this?


Le Mon, 06 Dec 2010 08:19:18 +0100,
Florian Effenberger <floeff@documentfoundation.org> a écrit :

Hi,

Cor Nouws wrote on 2010-12-06 08.09:
If those two or three employ so many developers on LibO that
they can have a very large majority when voting for BoD seats,
that could happen. But hey, two or three major sponsors
cooperating in such an harmonius way in the project, would be
so great ;-)

generally, yes, but on the other hand, this once again makes us
very dependent, while we claim to be independent. Who can ensure
that decisions are not made just for corporate benefit (once
again playing paranoia)? :)

Well, I'm totally undetermined on this point, so just as a thought
from my side. :-)



Hello Charles, Florian, et al,

The document reads like a final statement of intentions for me.

Florian's earlier points regarding not excluding all TDF employees
from the board made good sense, particularly given the size of the
foundation currently,and a board consisting of 9 members, fewer board
members (half that) and I might disagree.

The one month governor in the solemn address clause I think was a good
addition. Opening us up to unwarranted agitation in the community was
my biggest concern in raising the point regarding a call for early
elections and this is a good way to mitigate that risk.

As for the later points on future full autonomy vs control by a small
group of corps. I think in the end there is no way to codify that risk
away, it just comes down to the people here. I would suggest that if
the board members act as stewards versus owners of the roles they
take on for the community, then the community and therefor the
foundation should flourish, independently. Given what I know of, who
I know here, my belief is that there is a good chance of just that
happening.

IMO the likelihood of our staying independent, is much more dependent,
on the next phase of the Foundation's history. Constructing by
convention and act, rather then text, the 'nitty gritty' details of
how, as teams we will work together.

Guess that's a long winded +1 on the current draft as final. 
(typos not withstanding :-)

Drew Jensen






-- 
Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.