| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I think this structure could work -- despite being dependent on an |
| 4 |
> outside entity -- as long as our contract with SPI allows us to retain |
| 5 |
> rights to our assets. i.e. they can't rob us blind in the event of a |
| 6 |
> falling out or something. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Who would even be the parties to such a contract? The Gentoo |
| 9 |
Foundation would almost certainly sign a contract handing over the |
| 10 |
assets, but unless we keep it around (which involves almost all the |
| 11 |
work it does today; maybe a little less if it has no financial |
| 12 |
transactions though I'm not sure if such corporations generally are |
| 13 |
allowed to exist) then there is no successor in interest to the |
| 14 |
contract. Legally nobody would have standing to enforce the contract. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
If SPI screws over Debian, then legally there is no "Debian" to |
| 17 |
contest the matter in a court. SPI IS Debian as far as the law is |
| 18 |
concerned. Ditto for Arch/Postgres/Libreoffice/FFMpeg/Xorg/etc. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Now, what I don't know is who their members/shareholders are legally. |
| 21 |
They would have standing to initiative a shareholder lawsuit if they |
| 22 |
felt that the corporation were not staying true to its charter. If |
| 23 |
the project liaison becomes a shareholder then that becomes some |
| 24 |
avenue of recourse, though we have no way to compel our project |
| 25 |
liaison to take a particular action, just as today we have no way to |
| 26 |
compel the Trustees to run the Foundation in any way (at least, not |
| 27 |
legally). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> What really should decide this imo are the people who have been doing |
| 30 |
> foundation work already. Ask them if they're okay with throwing away |
| 31 |
> their work for a company to handle it for us. They're the ones most |
| 32 |
> impacted by such a decision and deserve the most influence imo. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Nobody should be contributing with the expectation that people in the |
| 35 |
future are beholden to them. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I'd argue that drobbins did a lot more work on this front than any of |
| 38 |
the current Trustees. Should we have him decide for us? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
The stuff I contribute to Gentoo is freely given. If I'm gone in a |
| 41 |
few years I'd hope that the people carrying forward the work of Gentoo |
| 42 |
would focus on what makes it most efficient for them to contribute and |
| 43 |
not stop and wonder "what would this random past developer want us to |
| 44 |
do?" |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
Rich |
Archives