Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Josip Rodin <joy(at)entuzijast(dot)net>
Cc: treasurer(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status
Date: 2007-03-11 18:20:52
Message-ID: 200703111120.52744.josh@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

Josip,

> Anyway, do other associated projects implement any similar safeguards?

Speaking for PostgreSQL, no, not really. However, it takes us less than a
week to replace our Liason if it becomes necessary, and frankly our charter
was written with having a second PostgreSQL person on the board as assumed,
so that person acts as a brake on the Liason going 'round the bend.

Also, I think we have more faith in our ability to pick a liason who won't go
berserk. ;-)

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Project
Core Team Member
(any opinions expressed are my own)

Responses

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2007-03-11 18:28:41 Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status
Previous Message Josip Rodin 2007-03-10 14:10:56 Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status