[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses
From:       Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2013-11-29 23:04:42
Message-ID: 1385766306.3260.0 () NeddySeagoon_SSD
[Download RAW message or body]


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 #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]