[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws

Hello Gianluca,

Le Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:50:28 +0100,
Gianluca Turconi <ml@letturefantastiche.com> a écrit :

> Il 14/11/2010 14.29, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
> >> 1) Quotation from the draft: "The Engineering Steering Committee
> >> (ESC) is made of developers who are coopted (i.e, there's no need
> >> for election and there can be as many members of the ESC as
> >> needed)."
> >>
> >> question: *must* these developers be Foundation *members* at the
> >> same time too?
> >
> > Your question is giving me the opportunity to clarify something
> > which is in the bylaws but it needs to be clearly written: the
> > foundation itself (the legal entity) will not/shall not have members
> > per se.
> OK. It works like in Italy.
> So, we're now *formally* speaking about a real Foundation, not an
> "Association" with members.

Yes. Although this notion fades away as soon as you're into an
Anglo-Saxon context. But so far, we intend to have a real foundation,
if we can't, we'll still keep the "formal setting" and concept of a

> Therefore, if I'm not wrong, there is a whole part of the bylaws that
> is "informal" (membership, board election, ...), this is to say it is
> not legally enforceable in a country like France or Italy. Or it is
> partially enforceable only.

Yes, and this is why we named them "community bylaws" and not a
"Foundation bylaws" or "statutes". So this document is what we do on a
daily basis, not an establishment of an entity. But we do intend to
follow these bylaws, as they will be the one ruling how we work and

> That's just fine, IMO, as far as the (individual) "members" exactly
> know what their *real*, legally enforceable rights are. In a
> sentence: where the Foundation ends and the Community begins.

> Corporations and administrations understand this kind of stuff better
> than individual persons. ;-)
> >> possible issue: sponsored developers can be coopted by other
> >> developers and their employer can gain more powers/rights other
> >> than the seat in the Advisory Board.
> >
> > Yes it is a risk, but then there is also social pressure, that works
> > in two ways. What would you suggest ?
> A balance of powers. :)
> This is to say: both BoD and ESC with a fixed number of members
> should be elected from "members" and "members-developers" and a
> maximum % of those seats reserved to main sponsors. AB with its
> advisory role remains for *all* sponsors.

Well, I don't wish to discriminate that much; see my proposed provision
for the three members of the BoD as being employees of the same
company. As for the ESC, I do believe that (aside the solution
discussed for the Chairman's election) we should thus have either a
limit on its members with equal or similar provision put on the number
of employees of a same corporation, and a specific number of members
(we can have a variation and a ratio if needed).


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

E-mail to steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[steering-discuss] Community bylaws"Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylawsGianluca Turconi <ml@letturefantastiche.com>
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws"Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylawsGianluca Turconi <ml@letturefantastiche.com>
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.