| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 5 |
| This is a brief update for the status meeting this Sunday. |
| 6 |
| |
| 7 |
| 1. I have not yet heard back from Mr. Chew in New Mexico on our |
| 8 |
| reinstatement. He indicated that it would take a few days, so this is |
| 9 |
| not a concern. I do not know (and he did not know) just what |
| 10 |
| information he needs from the state, so NM government agencies might be |
| 11 |
| involved. I'll call him at the end of the week if we haven't heard |
| 12 |
| anything. |
| 13 |
No worries, once we know then we know what we need to do and how much it |
| 14 |
will be. I figure ~1 hour to figure our our status and then probably |
| 15 |
another ~1 hour for filing is what we'll be billed for at the moment. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
| |
| 18 |
| 2. I have looked at the proposed bylaws on our web site and as revised |
| 19 |
| on 2007-01-22. Except for the change from NM to Delaware, the proposed |
| 20 |
| revision is closer to what we actually are. That said, let me raise a |
| 21 |
| few points. |
| 22 |
| a. The (2007-01-22) proposal is quite detailed. Do we want the |
| 23 |
| initial bylaws to go into such specificity? This is probably not a big |
| 24 |
| deal one way or the other, because the bylaws are easily amended. And |
| 25 |
| NM does not care what is in them as long as they do not conflict with NM |
| 26 |
| law. |
| 27 |
| b. Both sets of bylaws call out both a Board (of Trustees) and |
| 28 |
| officers of the Foundation chosen by the trustees. At the moment, we |
| 29 |
| (the trustees) are acting as the officers of the Foundation (because we |
| 30 |
| chose ourselves if for no other reason). We need to think through how |
| 31 |
| this works and what structure we want. |
| 32 |
| c. Trustees must be members of the Foundation, but Officers of the |
| 33 |
| Foundation need only to be alive (in order to carry out their duties). |
| 34 |
| Right now that is probably OK because we have neatly resolved the issue |
| 35 |
| for the moment (see point b). |
| 36 |
| |
| 37 |
| Because everything we do (in NM or anywhere else) keys off the bylaws, I |
| 38 |
| lean toward a recommendation as follows: After a quick scrub for sanity |
| 39 |
| and correctness, adapt the 2007-01-22 revision, with an eye to amending |
| 40 |
| it as experience warrants. And I know Roy has some ideas along these |
| 41 |
| lines which might belong in the bylaws or not. My inclination is to |
| 42 |
| pursue his ideas by other means because the bylaws should be rather |
| 43 |
| brief and general: The bylaws are the rules explaining who we are and |
| 44 |
| how we work procedurally. Thus, it is appropriate and necessary for the |
| 45 |
| bylaws to explain who the members are and how we vote, but inappropriate |
| 46 |
| for them to call out the President's salary. The bylaws are an enabling |
| 47 |
| document, giving the Trustees authority to act. |
| 48 |
I'd like to be around for any proposed changes..and I still need to |
| 49 |
review the bylaws, but I don't believe we can unilaterally change the |
| 50 |
bylaws per their inherent nature and statements of the members being |
| 51 |
able to vote on such changes I believe. Don't quote me as I've not read |
| 52 |
them in a while and really do need to reread them in detail. If I recall |
| 53 |
its not a "salary" but a stipend. Which is entirely different in the |
| 54 |
legal sense of the matter. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
| |
| 57 |
| I hope to have a bit more on this later this week, but I am sending this |
| 58 |
| out a bit early because I know Josh is travelling this weekend. and I |
| 59 |
| wish to give him a chance to respond. |
| 60 |
| |
| 61 |
Thanks for the list. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
As well I did a rough grep in ldap for user join date but not |
| 64 |
associating with a retiring date as we don't have a date for being |
| 65 |
retired. All members prior to 3/26/07 were included in the list I have |
| 66 |
in my home directory on dev. It totals to 506 members roughly, now note |
| 67 |
that this doesn't count for people who were here less then a year but it |
| 68 |
should be fairly easy to figure out who was not here for the full time |
| 69 |
or we could just do a clean slate and say everyone on that list was.... |
| 70 |
Of those 506 members, 379 are marked as retired in perl_ldap as well. |
| 71 |
That means that we have 127 developers who are active and part of the |
| 72 |
foundation. I can form a draft letter later to all members to collect a |
| 73 |
bare minimum of information we need from each one as many of the retired |
| 74 |
members no longer have forwards to other accounts making tracking of |
| 75 |
some down harder. If the requirement is simply a name and email the vast |
| 76 |
majority will be easy...however for those long retired it might be |
| 77 |
looking at if they are to still be considered members of the foundation |
| 78 |
as the bylaws have for the different levels of members. |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
Just another item that we need to get in order as well... |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
Its late and I must pack so have a good week all and I look forward to |
| 83 |
hearing what happened in the meeting. |
| 84 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 85 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) |
| 86 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 87 |
|
| 88 |
iD8DBQFH60Ta2ZWR0Jhg/EsRAvBfAJ9XkGycN9pkohmJAO/v7+FHCanB4wCeIs63 |
| 89 |
my8LYQuvtDj78jm+GyflAG0= |
| 90 |
=YZsT |
| 91 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 92 |
|
| 93 |
-- |
| 94 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives