public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 23:04:42 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1385766306.3260.0@NeddySeagoon_SSD> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21135.9762.315927.594803@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> (from ulm@gentoo.org on Fri Nov 22 09:38:42 2013)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1601 bytes --]

On 2013.11.22 09:38, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Roy Bamford wrote:
> 
> >> Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past 
> QA
> >> disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends 
> on
> >> how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily
> technical,
> >> then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't fit so 
> well.
> 
> > ... or maybe a sub committee of the Gentoo Foundation Inc?
> > because of the non technical and legal implications of the work.
> > Trustees get involved with licence corner cases anyway, so a team 
> of
> 
> > advisors would be a good fit.
> 
> I'd rather avoid the term "advisors", because we're no lawyers and
> therefore cannot give any legal advice.

Accepted.  Licenses already uses the trustees when legal advice is 
required.
> 
> It it clear that in some cases the licenses team will escalate issues
> to the trustees and not to the council. Nevertheless, I see a project
> (TLP or sub-project) as a good enough fit. So no need to invent new
> structures for us. The main goal of having a project page is to
> increase our visibility and to have a convenient starting point for
> organising our information in the wiki.
> 
> Ulrich
> 

The Foundation bylaws already allow for committees, none have been 
created yet but it would not be inventing a new structure. 

None of this has anything to do with Licenses having a project page 
or not.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-29 23:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-20 14:22 [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses Ulrich Mueller
2013-11-21 14:39 ` hasufell
2013-11-21 15:21   ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-11-21 21:11     ` Roy Bamford
2013-11-22  9:38       ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-11-29 23:04         ` Roy Bamford [this message]
2013-11-22 11:04     ` hasufell
2013-11-25  9:14   ` Thomas Kahle

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1385766306.3260.0@NeddySeagoon_SSD \
    --to=neddyseagoon@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox