From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | treasurer(at)spi-inc(dot)org |
Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Josip Rodin <joy(at)entuzijast(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status |
Date: | 2007-03-11 21:20:41 |
Message-ID: | 45F472A9.8000205@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-general |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Ted,
>
>> If however the SPI is responsible for making a judgement call about
>> the murky nature of Debian politics, particularly since certain
>> aspects of Debian's policies and procedures are not necessarily
>> clearly defined (or at least subject to dispute leading to mailing
>> list flames that go on and on for hundreds of messages) from a legal
>> point of view, then SPI could get dragged into what could be a nasty,
>> and potentially arbitrarily expensive legal adjucation procedure.
>
> I'm not so worried about legal culpability (how would Debian sue SPI when SPI
> provides Debian's legal help?). However, I *am* worried about making the
> wrong decision, and pissing off the "winners" in a long-running Debian
> dispute, and thus causing Debian members to distrust SPI and call for
> pulling out. This is *directly* based on my experience with the Dunc-Tank
> proposal.
>
> I really don't think that MJ and Ian realize how opaque and chaotic Debian
> politics are to outsiders.
I would second that. When I researched the OpenSource.Org domain issue,
I was stunned at how convoluted and emotional everything was. Debian has
really appears to have grown (at least from an outsider view) into a
very political self spinning organization.
Joshua D. Drake
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josip Rodin | 2007-03-11 22:28:25 | Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-03-11 21:17:35 | Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status |