Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap
- From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
- To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
- Cc: Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)gmail(dot)com>, damien clochard <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>, pgeu-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:06:53 -0800
- Message-id: <20080121080653(dot)09c876c6(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:00:55 +0100
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> > I believe this cannot be left out. I am for 'b'. Companies are not
> > members. Only individuals are members.
>
> Why shouldn't it be possible to leave it out?
> (And for the record, I'm for 'b' as well, but i'd rather keep it out
> completely)
One reason would be the make it very clear exactly what the expectation
of a Companies influence within the organization will be. If you leave
it arbitrary, is essentially can be voted differently by the board at
any time.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drkae
- --
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHlMMfATb/zqfZUUQRAudfAKCa0jzYmYRyp1ebxjsQxEEjK6eadACfcJFb
oMlUrQInSAzQH48vy0cdd7E=
=zgov
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index