Re: Board Appointee: Robert Treat Resolution 2008-01-24.jdd.1.1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The below resolution provides for an interim appointment of Robert
Treat to the board. Also attached to this motion is the reference
resolution that allows this appointment. The reference implementation
also discusses why the resolution exists. Before you argue:

1. It is interim. This motion is being submitted so the board can
continue to operate until the next election. (We may not reliably meet
quorum otherwise)

2. Robert Treat is not just some guy. He already works with the Board
via the affiliated project PostgreSQL.

Thanks, and have a great day.

SPI resolution 2007-01-24.jdd.1.1

WHEREAS

1. Josh Berkus wishes to resign from SPI Board.
2. The board wishes to ensure that is can continue to meet operate
effectively.

THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT

3. Robert Treat, current SPI Board Advisor for the PostgreSQL project
shall be appointed to the board of directors on an interim basis, as
per 2004-08-10-dbg.2. [1]

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

[1] http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2004-08-10-dbg.2/

- --
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD'

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHmhlRATb/zqfZUUQRAvxxAJ9niOmihq3eSvV9QN67TkJYR8sYpwCfe3h9
0WPjtdXl8U1P2u7eMp7QJuc=
=ITGY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote: [...]
> 1. It is interim. This motion is being submitted so the board can
> continue to operate until the next election. (We may not reliably meet
> quorum otherwise)

So if this is interim, the vacancy created by Josh Berkus will still
need filling according to the direction in Article Seven of
http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/by-laws
and as the board agreed last meeting, right?

> 2. Robert Treat is not just some guy. He already works with the Board
> via the affiliated project PostgreSQL.

Why would Robert Treat be better than those who showed the willingness
and commitment to stand at the last election? There doesn't seem much
rationale with that motion.

Would being both an adviser and a board member be in conflict?

Regards,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 11:09:40PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Would being both an adviser and a board member be in conflict?

Based on lots of past precedent with people who were simultaneously DPL
and on the SPI board, this would not be in conflict. (DPL is Debian's
advisor, in the same sense as Robert Treat for PostgreSQL.) That said,
following the procedure agreed upon by the Joshua Drake and the rest of
the board at the January meeting is the way to go.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 06:25:30PM -0500, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 11:09:40PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Would being both an adviser and a board member be in conflict?
>
> Based on lots of past precedent with people who were simultaneously DPL
> and on the SPI board, this would not be in conflict.

I seem to recall that the PostgreSQL Funding Group had a convention (but I
can't remember whether it's a rule) that the same people wouldn't be
involved in both. But this doesn't affect the SPI decision anyway.

A