Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [] A suggested topic for Planning Council Discussion

lol. I picked the right day to “work” at home ;)


At any rate, we need some sort of organizational answer to making requirements stick, or the exercise of defining them won’t seem like a great use of time either. J.


Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead,

From: [] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 4:15 PM
To: ''
Subject: RE: [] A suggested topic for Planning Council Discussion


Having the Planning Council mailing list guess what the fiduciary responsibilities of the Board may or may not be doesn’t seem like a great use of time. Trust me, this is well worn ground.


On the other hand, it is Friday afternoon and the weather is gorgeous…. J


How the conversation got to here from the idea of defining and enforcing technical requirements for projects to participate in a release just boggles my mind.


Mike Milinkovich

Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228

Mobile: +1.613.220.3223



From: [] On Behalf Of Scott Lewis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [] A suggested topic for Planning Council Discussion


Hi Doug,

Doug Schaefer wrote:

I’m not sure the Board would agree that this isn’t about business.

I'm sure some/many of them would think it's about business...specifically *their* business.  But the EF is not a business, and the Board members are not representing shareholders.

At the end of the day the Board decides.

IANAL, but I don't think the Board can decide to have a non-profit organization (EF) do something that is clearly/obviously in the commercial interests of *some/one* of the member organizations.  Again IANAL so I may be wrong about details...but I think the Board does have responsibilities that are not the same as the feduciary responsibilities of a commercial organization's Board.


Back to the top