Mozart governance: Board proposal

[Fred Spiessens]

Christian Schulte wrote:
> Actually, as I expressed already in the first discussion I'd rather settle
> for the small board proposed by Peter earlier and then - with the proposed
> mechanisms - extend the board accordingly.
> 
> Somehow it feels odd and unproductive to me to go to great length to
> implement the MEP thing and then not use it.
> 
> Christian
> 
> --
> Christian Schulte, http://www.imit.kth.se/~schulte/ 


I can see the logic in this "bootstrap" argument, but one could also 
argument that the MEP process should be guarded from the start by a 
representative (an thus large enough) board.

I'm in favor of Peter's proposal. Let's get things moving at last.

Fred.



> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mozart-hackers-bounces at ps.uni-sb.de
> [mailto:mozart-hackers-bounces at ps.uni-sb.de] On Behalf Of Peter Van Roy
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 9:53 AM
> To: Peter Van Roy
> Cc: hackers at mozart-oz.org
> Subject: Re: Mozart governance: Board proposal
> 
> 
> Dear Mozart people,
> 
> After exchanging emails with people, I propose the
> following initial Board:
> 
>    Raphaël Collet
>    Denys Duchier
>    Seif Haridi
>    Torbjörn Lager
>    Konstantin Popov
>    Camilo Rueda
>    Christian Schulte
>    Gert Smolka
>    Peter Van Roy
> 
> What do you think?  Can we start with this initial
> Board and the latest governance proposal?  Can we
> now start submitting MEPs and get Mozart development
> moving along?  We have a few things on the burner at
> UCL that we would like to see in Mozart.  I expect the
> Board to play an active and positive role in furthering the development of
> Mozart!
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> _____
> mozart-hackers mailing list
> mozart-hackers at ps.uni-sb.de      
> http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-hackers
> 
>