Minutes for Foundation Board meeting 2002-10-22
- From: Telsa Gwynne <hobbit aloss ukuu org uk>
- To: foundation-list gnome org, foundation-announce gnome org
- Subject: Minutes for Foundation Board meeting 2002-10-22
- Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 11:29:50 +0000
Minutes of the GNOME Board meeting 2002-10-22
Jonathan Blandford Jim Gettys
Nat Friedman (chair)
Telsa Gwynne (minutes)
Miguel de Icaza
ACTION: Nat write down a draft for the foundation acceptance guideline
the schedule a meeting by Friday if possible with people from
the election committee.
=> See discussions below for the full story; but done.
ACTION: Tim and Federico to produce a balance sheet for last fiscal year.
ACTION: Jim to restart the font discussions with various parties
=> Jim reported progresses with a well-known font maker,
Jim wait from feedback from the lawyers
=> Jim is away for this meeting.
ACTION: Jonathan talk to gnome-sysadmin about adding ssh
tunnelling for GNOME CVS access
=> Jonathan will try to get this scheduled with Owen.
The ssh tunnelling will get added when the new CVS machine
ACTION: Jody volunteer for working on producing a first
draft of ABI rules for GNOME-2 releases, get involvement from
someone at Sun, and make sure the draft get some review.
=> Worked on it but not finished yet
ACTION: Tim looking at structuring tutorials, need to send a
call for speakers
ACTION: Jonathan to work with Louie to put the organisation chart on the
=> This is in progress: Luis is sending mails clarifying what
goes where madly and has sent a drawft for comments to
ACTION: James and Federico to look at copyright assignment guidelines
ACTION: Tim to send out the report he sent to board-list to foundation-list
ACTION: Nat to send his guidelines for Foundation membership out.
Decisions and discussions:
* Approve last meeting's minutes:
They are at:
* The GNOME Foundation membership guidelines: we have changed them.
The guidelines the membership committee has been using for approving
renewals and approving new members for the GNOME Foundation were
fairly stringent, and the committee, applying them, had to say "no"
to people who were rather surprised. Some people on foundation-list
felt the guidelines should be changed:
Thread subjects: "Astonishment"; "gnome foundation" and
"[Fwd: Resignation from GNOME Foundation Membership Committee]"
Nat sent a draft version of a proposal for new guidelines which were
less stringent to board-list and much debate ensued. There was no
So we tried to arrange a separate conference call between (some of)
the board and (some of) the membership committee to get their input.
This took place on Friday 12th October 2002. Still no real consensus,
since the same very distinct two different viewpoints were emerging.
Because the elections are approaching and there are people whose
applications are in limbo, we took a vote on whether to use Nat's
proposals which relax the restrictions.
Jim was not present but voted by email. The vote was eight in favour,
two (Telsa and Jonathan) not in favour, and one abstention (James).
So Nat's new proposals are the guidelines for the membership committee
when looking at new applications; and the membership committee can
un-freeze the election process.
Nat's proposals are in the membership-committee mailing list archives:
* Administrivia and legal items
Massachussets law expects us to fill a form which is signed by
president and clerk. The people who share the secretarial duties
for meetings (Daniel, Jody and Telsa) are not usually in the US.
But Daniel will be in US shortly and sign it.
Tim has been working with the lawyers again. They recommend that we
accept formal copyright assignments of GNOME code if people want to
assign it to us. Tim has a draft set of guidelines for this. James
and Federico will look at it with him.
Tim has drawn up a balance sheet which we need for a "990 form".
Tim has also done much more, and sent the complete list to board-list.
He will send it to foundation-list.
According to the by-laws, we can change the number of people on
the foundation board. We didn't need a vote on this: consensus
was that the number (currently eleven people voted for and who
have votes, plus Tim as 'executive director') is fine as is.
] [Thread Prev