`Standing resolutions'

Ian Jackson ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Tue Dec 16 23:57:28 UTC 2003

John Goerzen writes ("Re: `Standing resolutions'"):
> Some comments:
>  1. I don't think that we need a general over-all expiration date.  If
>     the Board wants to set an expiration for a particular item, it can
>     do so, of course.  My concern is what will happen if we have lots of
>     these things to keep track of and fail to renew something tnat
>     people didn't realize was expiring -- plus the added workload,
>     presumably on the secretary.

Perhaps it would be better, given SPI's history, and the consequences
of expiration, to have a date in the resolution saying `the policy
stands until amended or withdrawn, but board resolves to reconsider
the matter at its first meeting 3 years after the policy is last
reconsidered' or some such.

>  2. Policy should be numbered and organized, similar to, for example,
>     Debian policy or (better) United States Code.  Board resolutions
>     that adjust policy or adopt new policies will essentially say
>     "change paragraph x.y.z to foo" or "add new section foo after
>     x.y.z" or "delete section x.y.z".  It will be completely clear from
>     resolutions exactly what the change is.

Something like that, yes.  Although I was imagining that the policies
would have titles and named sections, so that you don't end up with
opaque edits like "from policy no.14, delete paragraphs 2 and 3 and in
paragraph 4 change the 2nd `and' to `or'" :-).

If other people think this is a good idea, or have comments, please
say so.  If it seems to generally meet with favour, I'll draft a
resolution for the next board meeting if that seems to be the right


More information about the Spi-bylaws mailing list