[maemo-community] By-Laws for Hildonfoundation

From: gregor herrmann gregor+maemo at comodo.priv.at
Date: Sat Aug 25 20:16:44 EEST 2012
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 22:30:07 -0400, robert bauer wrote:

Thanks for your quick reply!

> > I don't see the necessity for creating a foundation instead of using
> > the services of e.g. SPI [0] or the SF Conservancy [1] in the USA or
> > FFIS e.V. [2] in Europe. Has this been considered, and if yes, why
> > were these options discarded?
> SF Conservancy was approached.  They were discouraged by the number of
> closed source packages in maemo.  SPI requires a referral and we might
> approach them if we have one.  To my knowledge, FFIS e.V. has not been
> approached.

I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "referral" here; my
understanding of the process (from reading [0] and watching SPI's day
to day work) is that after an informal request one of the directors
acts as a sponsor for an application, which means that they then lead
the formal process.

If there is interest in the maemo community to explore the SPI
option, a short mail to board at spi-inc.org might be a simple first

[0] http://spi-inc.org/projects/associated-project-howto/
> > | The Foundation shall maintain a community with open membership
> > | having minimal criteria for membership
> > Which criteria? Shouldn't they be spelled out in the by-laws?
> The criteria for community membership should not be in the by-laws.  This
> is somewhat like stating what membership fees (which we probably will never
> have) should be, which should never be made inflexible by stating them in
> the bylaws.  The reason there is mention of the community is to try to show
> that we are not trying to change maemo from what it is now.

I see, then I misunderstood this sentence.
> > | No member may be removed from the community except for violating
> > | procedures and rules that the community shall subsequently adopt.
> > s/community/Foundation/ I guess.
> > (The "community" doesn't exist legally so removal or admission isn't
> > possible.)
> Well, all of the bylaws apply once the Foundation is established.  Again,
> this is something to show that we are trying to be inclusive as we are now.
> I don't object to taking these two sentences out of the bylaws.

Or maybe clarified like you did in your mail? Like saying explicitly
that the Foundation is just the legal body serving the existing Maemo

> > | Within one year, the initial Board shall determine the criteria and
> > | method for the selection of subsequent Board of Directors.
> > I don't think that's a good idea. From my understanding of the nature
> > of by-laws, clarifying how officers are (s)elected is one of the
> > crucial things to have.
> Sure.  Do you have a proposal?  This is one of those catch 22 issues
> implied by your previous query - how do we select the initial Board for an
> organization that doesn't exist yet?  I'll add to that - how do we allow
> for having someone from Nokia or Jolla on the Board (if we want to do that)?

Yup, this bootstrapping is not trivial :)
Couldn't we just say
- the initial board is the Community Council at the point in time of
- the initial rules of election for the board (i.e. unless changed
  later via the membership) are the same as for Council elections

Thanks again,

 .''`.  Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06
 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer  -  http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Tina Turner: Way Of The World
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-community/attachments/20120825/250046da/attachment.pgp>
More information about the maemo-community mailing list