[quagga-dev 16564] Re: [PATCH 2/3] HACKING: Add 'Objectives', 'Governance', and an initial 'Code of Conduct'

Paul Jakma paul at jakma.org
Thu Feb 2 13:08:40 GMT 2017


On Thu, 12 Jan 2017, Paul Jakma wrote:

> +Governance {#sec:governance}
> +==========
> +
> +The governance of Quagga is currently in flux.
> +
> +Quagga was forked from GNU Zebra by Paul Jakma, who holds the domain name.
> +Governance was soon devolved to a collective group, the maintainers.
> +
> +Governance at this moment is again fully in the hands of Paul Jakma, to be
> +recast.
> +
> +Holding of project assets
> +-------------------------
> +
> +One or more mature, independent trustees, with technical and free software
> +experience, will be appointed as the executor(s) for key assets of the
> +project to ensure continuity, such as the domain name.
> +
> +Should a corporate vehicle ever be created to hold such assets it __must__:
> +
> +* Publish up to date accounts on a regular business.
> +* Generally operate openly and transparently.
> +* Have control distributed, with a significant degree of control held
> +  independent of any contributors with business interests in the software.
> +* Carry out no other business itself that may be seen to conflict or compete
> +  with the business of others in the community.
> +* Have all officers disclose all interests that could be
> +  seen to have a bearing on the project, as far as is reasonable.
> +
> +It not clear at this time that the overheads and potential liabilities of
> +such a vehicle would be appropriate for this project.  These principles
> +should though still be applied, where possible, to any non-corporate body
> +formed around the project.

Oh, others in the past (before the lovely manoeuvrings of '15/'16) have 
made a good case for SFConservancy.org. Though:

a) It doesn't avoid having to sort out project side governance, to
    interface with SFConservancy.

b) One other issue I had was that any long-term assets (e.g. domain
    names) would end up stuck under US law pretty much forever more. I
    would probably prefer a more local jurisdiction.

I read recently of a UK CIC (a type of UK corporate body required to act 
in the public-interest) with similar aims to SFConservancy:

 	https://publicsoftware.eu/

(via:
   https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/713073/fd6db0a111ab8b7e/
   / https://lwn.net/Articles/713073/ )

Maybe an option. Assuming a community rebuilds again anyway...

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma | paul at jakma.org | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself.
 		-- A.H. Weiler



More information about the Quagga-dev mailing list