From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C243A139085 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:20:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B8D4F23409B; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:20:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-x241.google.com (mail-oi0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 803F823409A for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:20:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-x241.google.com with SMTP id j15so22866691oih.0 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 09:20:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=scriptkitty-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=Gp8ncI3cYvHiRKMuX9pmpH2eofhiFa4+1KMLJB9DZ8k=; b=OHQ1Wr5JtRaBcmHK8PwkNWLEsdRFIFG2Sm4wGPHSPELdgsrycm8UnvHE82rrqfg7Oc 51DvfoIcV+L+B9eDlfl7uxVziPlXx17qcu7PK5FP4AzAbWOjUFgsPbec/KVCf/gNYayY z6y0i46V8EedX/9V7a+FOvR/Yz57j+fjo0+yxK3FqiI9cL/qvU1X0pZ0xP6eTj7djfmA qVCJfne20QZ56eDQQ6ReTAeqYD8AJHuRgMrbok2GLFb0/9fZDOYpXaf6bMm0yjjThDGS f8dn4TOU5770dOu8yey1DUe5DjHL2y7xhhRfgVPOReeWCiynnFM4LPZksEtRUKyPnEp8 cGjQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Gp8ncI3cYvHiRKMuX9pmpH2eofhiFa4+1KMLJB9DZ8k=; b=CdbDjeudiUnnrQlex2hOaBhmdPsoCyOSwQeuyvTZP1/pw6kgELxHhNsB7QQILLEOfx 1O9Sr+uMB+4oeTAu5KZ0cLv9KNuz9Uf0yR61dRC6pt4be+pqrDNle9shJ1UJAAsKD5nj Khl5ZOrl+NBfWkdE0VfqiX3X59EZ8zLu1rxhcFK15bkSVgYFxlkShDhdx3Nul7FsiUe2 UnXMeLD8De7WRo1m3BofytGwV2kOLq5xFDmwlO/AyypuQMn9SWHzzroXlpdyJU1Do7Mk 3tHGCk5sjWys91a1vD79RqVfJ6tA0IdYMqSURt9raxe/OHqx1LGEveplcUC51kzjOEsr EgDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJvyFrQ4hd47KIERyDT3I0XTunvi1WueDY/6eLe585mtJCAXsiTrhxoWcC+8G+949bdPt6U/JcAcJMyfw== X-Received: by 10.202.241.87 with SMTP id p84mr4828881oih.195.1484155252404; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 09:20:52 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.182.156.15 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 09:20:51 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [50.184.239.68] In-Reply-To: <87y3yha5me.fsf@kestrel.kyomu.43-1.org> References: <35d4687b-4cbd-cf79-254c-c7476c06bb3a@gentoo.org> <1d601c44-e136-382d-54f4-27d3437dfcc5@gentoo.org> <87r349iy3d.fsf@kestrel.kyomu.43-1.org> <877f61bkxw.fsf@kestrel.kyomu.43-1.org> <87y3yha5me.fsf@kestrel.kyomu.43-1.org> From: Alec Warner Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 09:20:51 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pYEUoRMq-eHSuPAkevarSR-RgNY Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Merging Trustees and Council / Developers and Foundation - 1.0 reply To: gentoo-project Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c09254a9c8be70545d4d2c8 X-Archives-Salt: 303b7abd-787d-4f5f-bfae-8529f86b4ee1 X-Archives-Hash: 096f33e6c343a93dc8302b37bf795da8 --94eb2c09254a9c8be70545d4d2c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Matthias Maier wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017, at 10:56 CST, Alec Warner > wrote: > > > I suspect one problem might be: > > > > 1) Most developers are not interested in Foundation affairs. > > 2) The Foundation is often minimally staffed with enough members (to > vote) > > and trustees (to run the foundation legally.) > > 3) In the past, the Foundation failed to renew its New Mexico filing > (which > > was fixed later.) > > 4) The status of the Foundation with regards to the US tax organ (the > IRS) > > is decidedly unclear at this time (but its being worked on.) > > > > So there is some concern that the Foundation is not being run well in the > > current system. Keeping the current system is worrisome (as a current > > trustee, I certainly worry about it!) This is one reason why I think the > > status quo is a bad idea. > > But if *that* is the problem, it would be the logical step to disband > the Foundation and simply transfer assets to SPI [1,2], which is done > quite successfully by a number of important open source projects > including Linux distributions Arch and Debian. > It might be a logical step (I'm unconvinced it is the *only* logical step.) Hence this whole thread, no? :) -A > > Best, > Matthias > > [1] http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/ > [2] http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/relationship/ > --94eb2c09254a9c8be70545d4d2c8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Matthias Maier <<= a href=3D"mailto:tamiko@gentoo.org" target=3D"_blank">tamiko@gentoo.org= > wrote:

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017, at 10:56 CST, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I suspect one problem might be:
>
> 1) Most developers are not interested in Foundation affairs.
> 2) The Foundation is often minimally staffed with enough members (to v= ote)
> and trustees (to run the foundation legally.)
> 3) In the past, the Foundation failed to renew its New Mexico filing (= which
> was fixed later.)
> 4) The status of the Foundation with regards to the US tax organ (the = IRS)
> is decidedly unclear at this time (but its being worked on.)
>
> So there is some concern that the Foundation is not being run well in = the
> current system. Keeping the current system is worrisome (as a current<= br> > trustee, I certainly worry about it!) This is one reason why I think t= he
> status quo is a bad idea.

But if *that* is the problem, it would be the logical step to disban= d
the Foundation and simply transfer assets to SPI [1,2], which is done
quite successfully by a number of important open source projects
including Linux distributions Arch and Debian.

It might be a logical step (I'm unconvinced it is the *only* lo= gical step.) Hence this whole thread, no? :)


--94eb2c09254a9c8be70545d4d2c8--