Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: treasurer(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Josip Rodin <joy(at)entuzijast(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status
Date: 2007-03-11 21:17:35
Message-ID: 45F471EF.1080802@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Josip,
>
>> Anyway, do other associated projects implement any similar safeguards?
>
> Speaking for PostgreSQL, no, not really. However, it takes us less than a
> week to replace our Liason if it becomes necessary, and frankly our charter
> was written with having a second PostgreSQL person on the board as assumed,
> so that person acts as a brake on the Liason going 'round the bend.

Actually 10 days ;) but yes PostgreSQL is set up to have some fairly
easy control in replacing their Liason.

>
> Also, I think we have more faith in our ability to pick a liason who won't go
> berserk. ;-)

Thanks ;0

Joshua D. Drake

>

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-03-11 21:20:41 Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status
Previous Message Theodore Tso 2007-03-11 20:39:18 Re: Draft resolution formalising Debian's Associated Project status