Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap

From: "Gabriele Bartolini" <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: "damien clochard" <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>, pgeu-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap
Date: 2008-01-21 16:10:37
Message-ID: ad9af2080801210810x6354d118w599b2fadbfb21735@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgeu-general
Ciao Magnus,

I'd argue that we don't need to write that in the statues...  We can leave
> that up to the board to decide.


The fee could change from year to year or every few years. The way I see it,
a statute should be carved on stone. :)

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)


Changes out of the statute are easier to do and do not require any official
administration procedure. For the reason I just said, I hope that this
decision won't ever change in the future. That's my opinion though.

Of course, writing in the statute does not prevent the statute to be
changed, but makes it harder. And potential members can see it a stronger
sign of the direction the NPO has taken since its foundation.

Absolutely. The most important things are the rules for how to chaneg
> things later :-)


:)

Ciao,
Gabriele

In response to

Responses

pgeu-general by date

Next:From: Hans-Juergen SchoenigDate: 2008-01-21 16:13:29
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2008-01-21 16:06:53
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group