On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think that's a fine and prudent idea, absolutely. The most > important objective for Fedora, in this case, is that the FEL and > Fedora are visible and relevant for EDA audiences worldwide, and that > Chitlesh and other FEL and Fedora contributors are empowered to > provide those resources to interested individuals and groups > effectively, without substantial drain on Xuropa's resources. Paul, If Xuropa is able to handle the accounting of donation collection and dispersement to specific upstream FEL related project development..or even to support Chitlesh directly to do FEL integration work would that be acceptable without any of the money coming into the Fedora project, would that be acceptable? The Board could come to an agreement with Xuropa as to the reporting and dispersement requirements Xuropa would need to do to keep the trademark access. I get the sense that Xuropa might be a better steward for donations targeted to further open EDA development than Fedora could be as they are an entity in the technical area that FEL targets. And if that's the case, just letting Xuropa manage the flow of donations to upstream projects may make some sense. -jef _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
