On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 03:48:14PM -0500, Richard Lowe wrote: > So, did anyone talk to Bill Franklin about any of the above? It seems > important to me that we know whether every Sun person has to act as > "Sun" for this purpose, or if they are actually individuals with free > will.
Why do we need to ask? Section 6.2 states explicitly that only natural persons may be board members. A corporation cannot be a board member, so neither does any member serve as a representative of any corporate entity. There is no controversy here: no one may serve on the OGB in any capacity other than that of a private individual. Suppose XYZ Corp. has a policy that its employees may not serve on any board unless they are doing so as representatives of XYZ, and then only with explicit management approval. Both XYZ Corp. and the OpenSolaris Community have the right (we assume) to enforce their respective policies; neither trumps the other. Instead, both are satisfied only if no XYZ employee is also an OGB member. Therefore, XYZ employees must adopt William T. Sherman's position: "If nominated, I will not accept; if drafted, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." If such a constraint is discovered or becomes effective while a board member is serving, he or she must resign or be removed by the Members. It makes no difference in this example whether XYZ is SMI, Joyent, or the Bank of China. Therefore the OpenSolaris side of this is a dead issue; there is nothing to discuss. It is of course appropriate for individuals to engage with their respective employers to determine whether applicable policies would permit them to serve the OpenSolaris Community as OGB members in the manner the constitution requires. But that engagement does not belong on a public mailing list. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" Fishworks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"
