Re: Changes to the GNOME Foundation Bylaws from 2002

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

I think Tobias's message missed out some context, so I'll try to fill in from
what I've been hearing as a foundation member.  Note that I'm not on the board
right now and have not been for over two years, and this is my personal
understanding of the situation.

So, I *think* Tobias is not proposing any significant changes to the bylaws.
He's proposing to change the canonical source of the bylaws to the
ReStructured-Text document that he sent, which includes all the amendments to
the original bylaws and minor modifications to adapt to the new format.  See:

 http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2002-2012.diff

One comment below:

On 10/01/2012 10:00 PM, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote:
> 
> I wonder what is the rationale behind the following change:
> 
> @@ -458,7 +522,7 @@
>  Election and Term of Office of Directors 
>  -----------------------------------------
>  
> -1.      Each of the directors shall hold office for one (1) year.
> +1.      Each of the directors shall hold office for one (1) year, or a
> period of up to two (2) years as determined by the Board and announced
> prior to an election being called.

Back in the days, Board terms were aligned to calendar years.  Ie. a new board
was running January to December.  Around 2008ish(?) board decided that it
would be much easier if a new board could take sit at GUADEC instead.  So we
wanted to change the term of one board to shift the phase.  This was against
the bylaws and needed an amendment.  Our lawyers (James Vasile?) recommended
that while changing the bylaws, we change it in a way that would accommodate
similar changes in the future.  Hence the wording that you see.  This is not
new.  This was voted on IIRC and approved, and used, years ago.

behdad