+1 Speaking ONLY as a community member I also support going ahead with the SFC.
Also agree with Dan that a smaller subset of the governance committee be elected to represent.
> To respond to your question about who would represent the Evergreen > project to the Conservancy, I personally think the entire interim > governance committee (20-ish people) would be way too unwieldy for > that role. One way of moving forward would be for the interim > governance committee to elect a subset (1, 3, 5, 7?) to act as > contacts with the Conservancy, as directed by the community via the > interim governance committee. We're probably not talking about many > actions in the short term, as we don't really have much in the way of > funds to direct (carry-overs from previous conferences to the next > conference, domain name renewals) and I'm not aware of any pending > legal actions. (Knock on wood!) "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens" ~ Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller
