Re: SPI's respect for debian resolutions, was: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads

From: Anthony Towns <aj(at)azure(dot)humbug(dot)org(dot)au>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: SPI's respect for debian resolutions, was: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
Date: 2007-02-15 15:42:59
Message-ID: 20070215154259.GB32578@azure.humbug.org.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 03:02:01PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> As I said on debian-project(?) I obviously agree with those
> statements.

To be a little more clearer than last time; I consider the "project
representative" position to be responsible for communicating that
project's decisions to SPI, and communicating anything relevant from SPI
back to the project. I think having the DPL be Debian's representative
is simple and expedient and that's about it. If Debian sees it as a
potential conflict of interest, it's easily changed, but I think it'd
be a lot of hassle for no benefit.

> If it would be helpful to Debian, I will draft a resolution in the
> now-standard format describing our current understanding of our
> relationship with Debian.
>
> AJ, do you think that would be helpful ?

I think this is mostly something that would be helpful for MJ, rather than
Debian as a whole; but I'd certainly expect SPI to have something in its
books making it official how Debian's decisions are communicated to SPI.

Cheers,
aj

Responses

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jimmy Kaplowitz 2007-02-15 16:01:12 Re: SPI's respect for debian resolutions, was: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
Previous Message Ian Jackson 2007-02-15 15:18:12 Re: Resolution 2007-02-15.jrk.1: Openness of Board Discussions