| From: | Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | board(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, secretary(at)spi-inc(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Resolution 2009-03-16.jrk.1: OpenWRT as associated project [revised] |
| Date: | 2009-03-17 18:43:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20090317184328.GC11317@kaplowitz.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | spi-general |
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 06:37:54PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> If Debian's Project Leader told us one thing, but the Secretary (or
> some other credible source) told us something else, we wouldn't expect
> Debian to provide a third person to distinguish (as if we were some
> kind of computational black box). We would review the relevant
> documents (ie, the Debian Constitution), and the relevant lists, and
> make our own minds up whether the decision was properly taken.
I thought other people were explicitly saying they didn't want SPI to have to monitor internal OpenWRT operations, and that they considered the arrangement with Debian to be a mistake which we shouldn't repeat. Can additional people give their thoughts?
- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-03-17 18:48:10 | Re: Resolution 2009-03-16.jrk.1: OpenWRT as associated project [revised] |
| Previous Message | Ian Jackson | 2009-03-17 18:37:54 | Re: Resolution 2009-03-16.jrk.1: OpenWRT as associated project [revised] |