On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 21:25 -0500, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > > Further, "governance" means many things.
Governance usually means who sets policy, who is accountable for outcomes. Where the buck stops. I have just been applying to the UK exam regulators to be a recognised awarding body and governance is a a key aspect of getting recognised. There does not seem to be too much ambiguity in meaning on that score. Its basically about representation, sanctioning policy, hearing disciplanry cases and being held accountable for outcomes. > As used by me, it does not > mean, say, who is present on the Community Council, but how code > contributions are processed. That seems to be a very narrow definition of governance if we are talking about a foundation that is representative of the entire OOo comunity project. > The former is pretty transparent-- > witness this exchange--the latter less so, if only because there is > the coincidence of Sun, as the major contributor, and Sun, as the > copyright holder. In creating a foundation, Sun will have to have less power and authority. Only they can decide whether in the whole scheme of things this furthers their interests or damages them. That judgement really is the essence of the debate and the risk associated with the decision the reason why there was not a foundation created from the outset. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
