Re: thoughts for when we get to the details of governance

>> Make sure that we have a convincing placeholder for governance [...], > What would you write in that governance page today? It should define our scope, and point out what direction we're considering the Gnome foundation model for governance. For example (totally spitballing here): """ The GNU Assembly is moving toward a small but real governance model, founded on adherence to the GNU social contract and our code of conduct. Governance comes up when specific decisions have to be made about GNU as a whole, such as defining the level of coherence of GNU packages and handling possible funding and legal matters. We are in early stages of formulating a governance model, but at this time we can state that we look at the Gnome Foundation as an example, and that our goal is to allow for transparent decision-making, and to have a healthy turnover of decision-makers that avoids focus on a single person. """

Finally, vis-a-vis my (and other) comments on Software Freedom Conservancy, it appears that there are some people who have had difficult experiences with them in the past. I think there is no urgency on that, but we should certainly make sure that everything is resolved and well-understood so that nobody feels unhappy with an eventual fiscal sponsor. If we don't hold monies then we might just be able to use their public-facing wisdom about legal matters.