Re: [GNHLUG] MerriLUG Nashua, Thur 15 Jan, Help!!! Org Meeting at MerriLUG

2009-01-15 Thread Heather Brodeur
Jim Kuzdrall wrote:
 Who  : The friendly, suave, intelligent, knowledgeable MerriLUG group 
 What : New program coordinator and speaker list
 Where: Martha's Exchange
 Day  : Thur 15 Jan **Tomorrow**
 Time : 6:00 PM for grub, 7:30 PM for discussion (usually upstairs)

I expect to be arriving between 7:00  7:30 tonight.

-Heather
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Boston Linux Meeting Wednesday, January 21, 2009 Improving online education and documentation for developers

2009-01-15 Thread Jerry Feldman

When: January 21, 2009 7PM (6:30PM for QA)
Topic: Improving online education and documentation for developers
Moderator: Andy Oram, Senior Editor, O'Reilly Media
Location: MIT Building E51, Room 325  NOTE: Room Change

Andy talks about Praxagora, an API for Project Educational Tools
Hundreds of new software projects spring up every month. Most are free 
software and are run by volunteers, but big players such as Google, 
Yahoo!, and Microsoft are now in the same game. Not only do these 
projects rely on online media (forums, chat, wikis) for documentation 
and support, but much of it is generated by project members on a 
volunteer basis. Andy has spent the past several years exploring the 
strengths and weaknesses of user contributions to software documentation 
and support. In this informal presentation, he'll show the results of a 
survey and some research on the quality of mailing lists, followed by 
suggestions for systems that could make better use of free user 
contributions. We'll then have a free-wheeling discussion that should 
interest anyone who cares about free software or the success of online 
software projects. Background for this talk can be found at: 
http://www.praxagora.com/community_documentation/




For further information and directions please consult the BLU Web site
http://www.blu.org
Please note that there is usually plenty of parking in the E-51 Parking
lot at 2 Amherst St, or on Amherst St.

We will adjourn to the Cambridge Brewery for our after meeting meeting.


--
Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: 537C5846
PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB  CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846









signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread paul . cour1

Bill said:   I'm reading a book about why this destroys shareholder valueWhat is the name of the Book?-pcJan 14, 2009 06:43:40 PM, b...@bfccomputing.com wrote:On 2009-01-14 3:35 PM, Jeff Macdonald wrote: This isn't strictly Linux related, but a pointy-hair boss here mentioned to a peer of mine the desire to bring these folks in. I'm at a loss why any company would actually need such a service, so I'm wondering if any of you have anyinsight.The Company probably doesn't but in many corporate cultures the job of the middle manager is to minimize risk and protect his career, not do great things for the Company.  I'm reading a book about why this destroys shareholder value, but, anyway, it's endemic.Especially if the PHB doesn't understand Open Source he's likely to want a scapegoat, and these guys may sell scapegoat services.  You might look on the bright side that TPHTB didn't call in a Windows consultant. The company I work for doesn't ship any code. We simply use open source in house to provide services.See SCO v. AutoZone, SCO v. Chrysler.  Autozone, at least, is still spending lawyer-dollars on this case, c., what, '03?  I haven't looked at the Chrysler case, but it's likely on Groklaw.  This is the reason I'm a former GNOME user... I would also think that once some sort of IP infringement is found, that would make the company more liable until such infringing code is removed/recoded.Good question for the PHB to cover with the corporate attorneys.  Some companies have taken this approach WRT patent searches and stuff, but I think it's a business decision for somebody with a corner office to make.-Bill-- Bill McGonigle, Owner   Work: 603.448.4440BFC Computing, LLC  Home: 603.448.1668b...@bfccomputing.com   Cell: 603.252.2606http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf___gnhlug-discuss mailing listgnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.orghttp://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Jeff Macdonald
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 8:01 AM,  paul.co...@verizon.net wrote:
 Bill said: I'm reading a book about why this
 destroys shareholder value

 What is the name of the Book?

ditto

-- 
Jeff Macdonald
Ayer, MA
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Jeff Macdonald
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bill McGonigle b...@bfccomputing.com wrote:

 The company I work for doesn't ship any code. We simply use
 open source in house to provide services.

 See SCO v. AutoZone, SCO v. Chrysler.  Autozone, at least, is still spending
 lawyer-dollars on this case, c., what, '03?  I haven't looked at the
 Chrysler case, but it's likely on Groklaw.  This is the reason I'm a former
 GNOME user...

um, but that would mean that BlackDuck has copies of everyone
propriety code, which it can't. The A,B,C example earlier in this
thread is more like what I believe BlackDuck is trying to prevent.
But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.




-- 
Jeff Macdonald
Ayer, MA
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Jeff Macdonald
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Paul Moore pcmo...@umich.edu wrote:

 [1] https://fossbazaar.org/home

Wow, very cool. Thanks very much for that link.

-- 
Jeff Macdonald
Ayer, MA
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Kevin D. Clark

Jeff Macdonald writes:

 But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.

You've made this statement twice now, but I myself don't understand
how this is relevant to the issue at hand.

The common licenses that are being discussed here do not have language
in them that reads if you don't distribute code, you're fine because
under certain circumstances that's exactly what you have to do --
distribute your code.

Regards,

--kevin
-- 
GnuPG ID: B280F24EIt's cold out there, colder than
alumni.unh.edu!kdca ticket taker's smile at the
http://kdc-blog.blogspot.com/ Ivar Theatre on a Saturday Night.
  -- Tom Waits
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Fwd: [nhruby-announce] Meetup Reminder

2009-01-15 Thread Jonathan Linowes

I'll be there,
and looking forward to seeing y'all :)


Begin forwarded message:


From: Nick Plante n...@zerosum.org
Date: January 12, 2009 6:25:51 PM EST
To: nhruby-announce nhruby-annou...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [nhruby-announce] Meetup Reminder
Reply-To: nhruby-annou...@googlegroups.com


Hello again everyone,

Just sending you a quick reminder that the first NH.rb of the new year
is happening this Thursday January 15th at RMC Research in Portsmouth.
Jon Linowes will be talking about ReviewRamp, his Rails-based service,
Cucumber integration tests, and adding dynamic attributes to
ActiveRecord models. For more information, including directions, visit
http://nhruby.org

In addition, I'm happy to announce that Engine Yard (http://
engineyard.com) will be picking up the cost of refreshments for the
meetup (pizza, sodas, et al -- let me know if you have special
considerations) and has also supplied us with some great giveaways.
Hope to see you there!

Best,

..nap
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups nhruby-announce group.

To post to this group, send email to nhruby-annou...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nhruby-announce 
+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/ 
group/nhruby-announce?hl=en

-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Jeff Macdonald
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Kevin D. Clark
kevin_d_cl...@comcast.net wrote:

 Jeff Macdonald writes:

 But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.

 You've made this statement twice now, but I myself don't understand
 how this is relevant to the issue at hand.

 The common licenses that are being discussed here do not have language
 in them that reads if you don't distribute code, you're fine

I guess this could be ignorance on my part, but it was my
understanding that at least with the GPL, one could do whatever they
want with the code. But if the code was later distributed, one had to
abide by the additional terms of the GPL.

 because
 under certain circumstances that's exactly what you have to do --
 distribute your code.

Now you are confusing me, is it relevant or not? :)

Either way I need to do some re-reading.

-- 
Jeff Macdonald
Ayer, MA
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Arc Riley
 I guess this could be ignorance on my part, but it was my
 understanding that at least with the GPL, one could do whatever they
 want with the code. But if the code was later distributed, one had to
 abide by the additional terms of the GPL.


Your understanding is correct, private use is not restricted by freely
licensed software.

The GPL and AGPL differ in the scope of private use however in that the
latter the copyleft terms are applied to all users of the software,
regardless of whether they receive a copy or merely use it over a computer
network (ie, a webapp, chat server, etc).

AGPLv3 covered works can include GPLv2+/GPLv3 code.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Kevin D. Clark

Jeff Macdonald writes:

 I guess this could be ignorance on my part, but it was my
 understanding that at least with the GPL, one could do whatever they
 want with the code. But if the code was later distributed, one had to
 abide by the additional terms of the GPL.

I believe you have some fundamental misunderstandings of how the GPL
works.  I'm not making a pejorative statement here; I'm just making a
statement of what I believe is factually true.

I believe my understanding of the GPL and related licenses is
correct.  For example, I got a perfect score the first time I took
this quiz:

http://www.gnu.org/cgi-bin/license-quiz.cgi


IANAL, and you should not depend on me for legal advice, but I feel
pretty comfortable in this area.

Regards,

--kevin
-- 
GnuPG ID: B280F24EIt's cold out there, colder than
alumni.unh.edu!kdca ticket taker's smile at the
http://kdc-blog.blogspot.com/ Ivar Theatre on a Saturday Night
  -- Tom Waits
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread jkinz
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:22:47AM -0500, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
  Jeff Macdonald writes:
  But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.
 ..
 I guess this could be ignorance on my part, but it was my
 understanding that at least with the GPL, one could do whatever they
 want with the code. But if the code was later distributed, one had to
 abide by the additional terms of the GPL.
 
 Now you are confusing me, is it relevant or not? :)
 
 Either way I need to do some re-reading.

The goal of the GPL is to have people share any changes they make
to GPL's code. (stating the obvious in crude and simple terms)

In GPL 2 - you only had to share your changes if you
distributed the code  (source or resulting binaries/executables).

As of GPL 3 - hmm - haven't read it enough yet. 

It seems clear that rms wants to include web services as code
distribution' as well. When that will be covered and by which
version of the GPL, is something I don't know, but it seems clear
that eventually anytime you sell or share a product with a
user base outside your own company, by any means the GPL will
require change sharing. [note the eventually]

by any means would include a web application or cloud computing
or anything of that nature where the user is using your code
even if it is not running on their machine, but one of your
servers (or even a cloud of donated cpu cycles). 

This is all speculation but the direction that web based apps and
services are headed clearly require rms to include them as forms
of distributing code to meet his goals.  Whether a license can 
do that legally will only be decided by courts.. someday..
maybe..  :-)

Jeff Kinz
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Tom Buskey
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Kevin D. Clark
kevin_d_cl...@comcast.netwrote:


 Jeff Macdonald writes:

  But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.

 You've made this statement twice now, but I myself don't understand
 how this is relevant to the issue at hand.



 The common licenses that are being discussed here do not have language
 in them that reads if you don't distribute code, you're fine because
 under certain circumstances that's exactly what you have to do --
 distribute your code.



If you distribute the compiled code (binaries) of GPL'd software, you must
make the SOURCE code available at a reasonable fee and not restrict further
distribution.

If you don't distribute the binaries, you don't have to make the source
available.

I think the confusion is over what code refers to.  Instead, use binaries
and source so there's no ambiguity.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Donald M Leslie
I think that calling them a scam is a thoughtless remark.

They presented at Pierce Law along with Richard Stallman , Dan Ravisher ( 
Free Software Foundation) and others on Law 
and Technology.

They said today you can no longer blindly ship software hoping you 
actually own everything in the software. There are
tools to allow the software to be validated. A management policy which 
forbids this regrettably does not work. This can result in expensive legal 
costs.

Don___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Don Leslie
I think that calling them a scam is a thoughtless remark.

They presented at Pierce Law along with Richard Stallman , Dan Ravisher 
( Free Software Foundation) and others on Law
and Technology.

They said today you can no longer blindly ship software hoping you 
actually own everything in the software. There are
tools to allow the software to be validated. A management policy which 
forbids this regrettably does not work. This can result in expensive 
legal costs.

Don

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Bill McGonigle
On 2009-01-15 8:43 AM, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
 um, but that would mean that BlackDuck has copies of everyone
 propriety code, which it can't. The A,B,C example earlier in this
 thread is more like what I believe BlackDuck is trying to prevent.
 But, as I said before, we don't distribute any code.

I was only responding to the statement that only using code in-house was 
a protection from risk.  SCO and Autozone were only using the code 
in-house, they didn't modify it (there was a claim by SCO of a 
third-party stealing its IP) and they've been in court for a handful of 
years over it.  It's baseless, but it's still a risk.

-Bill

-- 
Bill McGonigle, Owner   Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC  Home: 603.448.1668
b...@bfccomputing.com   Cell: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/
VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Bill McGonigle
On 2009-01-15 8:01 AM, paul.co...@verizon.net wrote:
 Bill said: I'm reading a book about why this
 destroys shareholder value

 What is the name of the Book?

The Innovator's Solution.  I'm only done with the first couple 
chapters, so I can't recommend the book as a whole yet, but the premise 
as I mentioned previously is illustrated with case studies in the first 
couple chapters and seems well-researched.  Supposedly the autors offer 
ways around the problem.

-Bill

-- 
Bill McGonigle, Owner   Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC  Home: 603.448.1668
b...@bfccomputing.com   Cell: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/
VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Kevin D. Clark

Tom Buskey writes:

 I think the confusion is over what code refers to.  Instead, use
 binaries and source so there's no ambiguity.

I think that this is the best observation in the entire thread.  This
is what I stumbled over in the original question.  Now that I re-read
the original question I recognize that my definition of code was
different from Jeff's.

Regards,

--kevin
-- 
GnuPG ID: B280F24EIt's cold out there, colder than
alumni.unh.edu!kdca ticket taker's smile at the
http://kdc-blog.blogspot.com/ Ivar Theatre on a Saturday Night
  -- Tom Waits
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Paul Lussier
Jeff Macdonald macfisher...@gmail.com writes:

 Hi all,

 This isn't strictly Linux related, but a pointy-hair boss here
 mentioned to a peer of mine the desire to bring these folks in. I'm at
 a loss why any company would actually need such a service, so I'm
 wondering if any of you have anyinsight. My view is that since open
 source software is publicly available, an organization that would
 claim IP (intellectual property) rights would simply be better off
 sending cease and desist orders to the author of code. I do understand
 that wouldn't be as profitable as going after a company with deep
 pockets. The company I work for doesn't ship any code. We simply use
 open source in house to provide services. I would also think that once
 some sort of IP infringement is found, that would make the company
 more liable until such infringing code is removed/recoded.

A good friend of mine worked at BlackDuck for a bit before moving to
California.  One of the things they do is help you audit your code so
you know what licenses the software falls under if you re-distributing
it.

Not all of what is avaliable for Linux is GPL'ed.  There are several
different FOSS licenses, and several free-ware licenses, etc.

For example, my last company build a product on top of a Debian base.
We needed to provide a copy of each and every license for each piece
of software (well, that's the lawyers told us).  In order to do that,
we needed to know what license each package fell under.  Sadly, many,
many packages don't have the License field of the .deb package
manifest file filled in.

BlackDuck (i.e. specifically my friend) has spent months painstakingly
researching each and every package for Debian (and probably RH,
others) and created a database correlating versions with packages with
licenses, etc.  Additionally, they've created checksums of everything
such that they can scan large repositories and detect these signatures
to help you determine if what your shipping falls under certain
licenses.

They are in fact a legit company, consisting of people who hold FOSS
very near and dear.  They have just found a way to monetize a service
around FOSS as well.

-- 
Seeya,
Paul
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Jeff Macdonald
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Kevin D. Clark
kevin_d_cl...@comcast.net wrote:

 Tom Buskey writes:

 I think the confusion is over what code refers to.  Instead, use
 binaries and source so there's no ambiguity.

 I think that this is the best observation in the entire thread.  This
 is what I stumbled over in the original question.  Now that I re-read
 the original question I recognize that my definition of code was
 different from Jeff's.

Ah, yes, sorry about that.


-- 
Jeff Macdonald
Ayer, MA
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Bill McGonigle
On 2009-01-15 5:36 PM, Paul Lussier wrote:
 BlackDuck (i.e. specifically my friend) has spent months painstakingly
 researching each and every package for Debian (and probably RH,
 others) and created a database correlating versions with packages with
 licenses, etc.  Additionally, they've created checksums of everything
 such that they can scan large repositories and detect these signatures
 to help you determine if what your shipping falls under certain
 licenses.

 They are in fact a legit company, consisting of people who hold FOSS
 very near and dear.  They have just found a way to monetize a service
 around FOSS as well.

Sweet, and somebody posted a site here recently that did something 
similar, perhaps it was theirs? (you could upload a code sample and it 
would correlate with its repository).

Are they fixing the debs too?

-Bill

-- 
Bill McGonigle, Owner   Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC  Home: 603.448.1668
b...@bfccomputing.com   Cell: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/
VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Re: Blackduck Software and IP

2009-01-15 Thread Dan Jenkins
Paul Lussier wrote:
 BlackDuck (i.e. specifically my friend) has spent months painstakingly
 researching each and every package for Debian (and probably RH,
 others) and created a database correlating versions with packages with
 licenses, etc.  Additionally, they've created checksums of everything
 such that they can scan large repositories and detect these signatures
 to help you determine if what your shipping falls under certain
 licenses.

 They are in fact a legit company, consisting of people who hold FOSS
 very near and dear.  They have just found a way to monetize a service
 around FOSS as well.
   
Oh, I wish I had known about them a year ago when I had to manually do 
much the same at a client.
(As well as trying to explain fourth hand to a lawyer what a compiler 
was and why we needed to use one - and, no, we couldn't write our own.)
They could have saved us several man months of effort, which was 
critically needed on actual development then.

___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/


Ubuntu NH Remix 9.04

2009-01-15 Thread Arc Riley
Hey Everyone

The Ubuntu NH LoCo is putting together a locally themed Ubuntu remix CD for
the 9.04 release this April.  The CD will be locally themed with it's own
artwork pack and links/integration with local/state resources (ie, NH law
search in Firefox/Deskbar, book search via regional library networks, etc).
Our goal is to commercially replicate/print 2500 of these for distribution
across the state (libraries, colleges, etc) in May through September (inc
SFD'09) funded by local sponsors.

Of course anyone using (k)Ubuntu will be able to install the local theme and
settings by adding our PPA (Personal Package Archive) to synaptic, the
install CDs will include these as default.

This is a big undertaking, so we're looking for photographers, artists,
developers, and people passionate about Ubuntu to join us in this effort.
We'll be following the Jaunty Release
Schedulehttps://wiki.ubuntu.com/JauntyReleaseScheduleand
participating in testing along the way.

Technical experience in packaging isn't a requirement, but if you're
interested in learning there are a number of workshops in the Ubuntu
Developer Week https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek, a free
workshop series run online next week during the day (11am to 4pm).  Logs
will be available on the wiki, but if you can participate there'll be a
lively Q/A session with each workshop.

Our team page is
https://launchpad.net/~nhremixhttps://launchpad.net/%7Enhremix-
anyone wanting to get involved should join and introduce themselves on
the
NH LoCo mailing list.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/