On Dec 3, 2007 1:11 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If people are going to be looking at licenses, I would very
much like to discuss the FDL v2, and our usage of the FDL in
general. There are some troublesome parts whose implications
for GNOME aren't clear to me.
On Nov 30, 2007 2:30 PM, Philip Van Hoof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the foundation could setup (orchestrate) meetings (or interops
or however you want to call them) with the different teams. Gather the
right people and put them together from time to times.
I agree 100% with this, and it
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:15 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 10:18 +, Diego Escalante Urrelo wrote:
On 12/1/07, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doing that quality control could eat some (human) resources. Also as
John says this could easily lead to an
There is no schedule for the next FDL. Since Wikipedia has made up
its mind, I want to (and owe it to them to) work on this soon.
However, there is time to listen to suggestions, if they come soon.
___
foundation-list mailing list
I don't recall that any candidate explicily rejected supporting the free
software movement by means other than improving the attractiveness and
success of GNOME. But several candidates answered in a way that seemed to
pointedly imply a rejection of any such form of support for
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 12:46 -0500, Adam Schreiber wrote:
On Dec 3, 2007 12:41 PM, Og Maciel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about North Carolina? We have a great place with big name
companies, schools and exciting people.
Seconded.
Adam Schreiber
*cough*Clemson University, Clemson,
GNOME is based on a philosophy, but it is not just a philosophy.
It is a project to develop and maintain a desktop environment.
A technical project has to make specific technical decisions. It
can't favor all the options that fit the philosophy; often it has to
choose an avenue and follow it.
