30 Jan
2004
30 Jan
'04
9:49 p.m.
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 19:47, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Not sure i understand. I assume it means it will ensure that each project gets one
vote and
that those who vote at least have some meritocratic claim to that vote.
Christian
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 11:53, Daniel James wrote:
But what will it solve?
If part of linuxaudio's agenda is to get funding to be
used for the
enhancement of the pro-audio development platform on Linux then having a
formal organization is essential. Companies and persons who would want
to sponsor such things needs someone to make an arrangement with.
That is why GNOME has the GNOME Foundation, Ogg has Xiph and is why we
have OSDL.
But if
your role would end, and you wouldn't be able to supervise,
who would handle the post then?
Naturally the consortium would change its contact address to another
post office box or office which was more convenient for the new
director. I would of course forward on any post.
From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch
of projects and
companies listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of
Daniel.
Quite true for the time being - which is why I'm trying to set up a
management board. The more time
we spend arguing about the same
points, the less time there is for advocacy.
?
An organisation should be the last step in
promoting linuxaudio.
There we disagree.
And i fear that it will involve another
mailing-list, what's worse,
a private one. The managment board mailing list.
The management board mailing list will have closed membership for a
very good reason - democratic accountability.