Re: [Spi-private] Re: money handling

Russ Nelson wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
> > newer projects which joined probably also joined (I know PostgreSQL did)
> > under the understanding that SPI was there to support but not direct.
>
> The theory behind SPI's continued ownership of opensource.org is that
> the Open Source Initiative is a project under SPI's purview. OSI
> doesn't need any of the standard "write checks, provide legal advice,
> hold assets", so why does SPI not hand over ownership of
> opensource.org?
>
> The theory is that SPI members have the right, the duty, and the power
> to withdraw the use of opensource.org from OSI should OSI ever take
> actions inimical to the interests of SPI. I emphasize that this is
> JUST A THEORY. SPI has NEVER directed NOR ATTEMPTED to direct OSI's
> activities. SPI hasn't even ASKED us to do anything, except maybe
> stand up a little straighter and get a haircut. However, there is no
> reason why this theory should not apply to all SPI projects. Thus, I
> should say that your understanding is wrong. In theory, anyway.

Wait, are you saying that in theory, the SPI could take PostgreSQL.Org?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Board candidates should be aware of this.
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/