Outdated bounties webpage

. But the bounty website isn't publicising it. http://www.gnome.org/bounties/Addressbook.html#127515 http://www.gnome.org/bounties/Tasks.html#127557 Claimed (somebody is working on it) http://www.gnome.org/bounties/Addressbook.html#127525 -- Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos home: me

Re: Formation of Gnome-user-foundation

will be happy. I hope -- Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos home: me at freax dot org gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: philip dot vanhoof at cronos dot be junk: philip dot vanhoof at gmail dot com http://www.freax.be, http://www.freax.eu.org

Additional questions for the board candidates

project for the GNOME desktop and infrastructure, how will you involve yourself in the One Laptop Per Child concept? -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x

Re: Additional questions for the board candidates

Congratulations. You got my vote. I don't think there's a lot, in your reply, I disagree with. On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 14:19 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 18:56 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: How important are desktop standards for you. How will you attempt to let

Re: Code of Conduct final draft?

are in general. If such a code would be agreed on, it should be very clear that it's indeed not how we really are in general. But rather how we would like to be on the island GNOME Utopia. Peace :) -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof

Re: Code of Conduct final draft?

Resending this message as it didn't get on the list because I used the wrong From header. On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 15:07 +0100, Telsa Gwynne wrote: Ar Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:57:10AM +0200, ysgrifennodd Philip Van Hoof: note. Maybe we should take this off the foundation-list? I don't know. I

Re: Code of Conduct final draft?

a mistake. It's human nature. Forgive people as they would forgive you. (And no, I'm not inspired by Christianity. I simply agree with it) If that point would be added, I would switch sides and would agree that the code is a good idea. [cut - I agree] -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x

Re: Code of conduct (bis)

these principles official. Not at all. -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be blog: http://pvanhoof.be/blog ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http

Re: Code of conduct (bis)

does. Because we want them to be like, to behave like and finally to be us. I disagree with that. -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog ___ foundation-list

Re: Code of conduct (bis)

to add and we really mean it, and then really we do. :-) -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http

Re: debug machine (was Re: Minutes of the Board meeting, 2006/Oct/25)

as a result would a lot gnome developers start making cool debugging software? like what happened with things like git?) -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org blog: http://pvanhoof.be/blog

FOSDEM '08

Is somebody this year taking care of the GNOME developer room at FOSDEM? I think this year you have to request one. Let's not forget to do that :) (has somebody done this already?) -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org

Money spending, questions for the candidates

passionate and successful. And if not, let's die trying. (now that's a good conclusion, no?) ps. I hereby promise I will try not to make such long philosophic E-mails anymore. You must be insane for reading all of it! -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot

RE: Money spending, questions for the candidates

to make the technology more popular. I don't think the Foundation should offer certification itself but maybe it could work together with an existing institute on expanding its training offerings around Gnome technology. Just my 2 ct. Indeed. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer

Re: Money spending, questions for the candidates

doesn't have, My project creates opinions from people who prefer MAPI over IMAP, web clients over normal E-mail, XMPP over SMTP, ... Lot's of free problems. Realism! I imagine fountains of FUD on every corner. That's unavoidable for anything we do. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software

Re: Can we improve things?

they are. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman

Re: Can we improve things?

, Federico, that if you dislike how Jeff maintains pgo, that you can start a competitor right now. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Call for hosts for GUADEC 2009

would love Canada to become part of Europe! We once made a tunnel* to the guys living on the British Islands, maybe we can make one to Canada too? ;-) * Regretfully is air-travel nonetheless cheaper than using the tunnel. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot

Re: Akademy+GUADEC *2009* Hosting Proposals

the event. At this time we are soliciting comments from the GNOME community and other GUADEC regulars. Please use this thread on foundation-list to submit your comments. The review period closes on July 4th, in preparation for making a decision in Istanbul. Regards, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof

Re: Using the proper feed for pvanhoof

of a genius. And that genius is Jeff. We just write the (sometimes silly) content. Thanks -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results

use-cases. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org

Sponsorship for hackfests

waiting for better economic times is even an option. Let's instead solve this. Cheers, -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Sponsorship for hackfests

think the keyword. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http

Re: Sponsorship for hackfests

going on. It doesn't mean that we must refrain from making decisions. And yes, some people will be so angry that they'll leave. You can't do good for everybody. Bad luck. Life goes on. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org

Re: Sponsorship for hackfests

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 13:56 +0200, Andreas Nilsson wrote: Philip Van Hoof wrote: I for example remember that in Berlin we had the idea of putting interviews with the hackers online. I never found those. I believe Mirco is still working on the editing of those. It appears he is almost

Re: Sponsorship for hackfests

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 13:02 +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote: 2009/3/31 Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org: Sorry, but being on a foreign country, for hacking purposes and still doing some blogging is hard enough. You can ask, but you can't enforce people to do it. Sorry, but I flat out disagree

Re: Supporting GTK+

application. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

as your concerns about bad behaviour of individuals. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 16:46 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: Philip Van Hoof wrote: snip aggressive rant As every opinion of me is looked as being aggressive, it's no longer possible for me to have this discussion in a constructive kind of way. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

. SO We are trying to fix a non-existing problem. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

sand and salt in the wounds? Other than the board wanting to perform such childish behaviour, what would be the purpose of that? Worsening the situation? Your steps achieved nothing constructive in this hypothetical case. Nothing at all. Not one single thing. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

time. Would also be more fair than how you are doing it now. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list

Re: GNOME leadership [was Re: So what do people *except* me want from the foundation?]

fine. Just don't create three overlapping governments with on top a federal one. I can tell you how bad that is. Bad. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

for their purchase to GNOME. It is not a good thing for the GNOME Foundation to support Amazon in this way. Amazon is one of the main perpetrators of DRM (see http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/07/orwell-2009-dystopia). -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof

Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

not GNOME's responsibility. I think this is a sufficient amount of morality checking. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation

Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

you and me differ on opinion. I think this is a black and white point of view. The reality of it is gray. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Free Desktop Communities come together at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit

for asking. When was the community consulted about this decision? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation

Re: Free Desktop Communities come together at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit

the members. http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2009-July/msg6.html Aha, thanks. Are the results of that survey available? -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Free Desktop Communities come together at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit

foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Free Desktop Communities come together at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit

, but they didn't. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman

Re: Free Desktop Communities come together at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit

. Meeting people is a reason why you do co-located conferences. [CUT - old reply content] -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Meeting Minutes Published - October 29, 2009

have to, and people who had to sign it. (FWIW, I have.) I'm not against requiring this. I'm against public punishments for people who violate it. I'm not against telling somebody in private to chill: Assume people mean well is an important advice in the Coc. Greetings, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 12:13 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote: On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: I (fully) agree with John here. The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason is a no for me personally. It's also

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

goes alongside assuming people mean well. And perhaps also - Remmeber that different cultures have different attitudes, styles and touchy subjects. Yes, good point. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

companies involved. Forbidding those contributors to talk about their work goes directly and philosophically against the Planet GNOME is a window into the world, work and lives of GNOME hackers and contributors slogan of the project. You see that word work there? Right. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

GNOME's from the admins. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

used in the field. Making it forbidden to use planet-gnome for that is like wanting to deny a reality. If GNOME wants to be relevant, it must not boycott reality. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

of those crazy people. Sorry for being direct. It's just my personality. Thank you. Let's now go back to solving some real problems in GNOME. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

identity. Cheers, Philip [1] You write minimal support. Minimal to me means: either you do this, or you're out. Feel free to correct me. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

a well-behaving GNU project, or having its own identity. Cheers, Philip [1] You write minimal support. Minimal to me means: either you do this, or you're out. Feel free to correct me. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 17:40 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Hi Dave! (Are you coming to FOSDEM? We need another of those IRL chats, no?) Philip Van Hoof wrote: I propose to have a vote on GNOME's membership to the GNU project. Such a vote, whatever the outcome, would have little effect

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 12:32 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: On 12/11/2009 11:32 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote: Philip van Hoof writes I propose to have a vote on GNOME's membership to the GNU project. I'd second this. Quick procedural note: If you really want to pursue this, according

Re: foundation-list Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13

into a cold one. I'm against the proposal because the planet is doing just fine. Why is that so hard for some people to accept? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: foundation-list Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13

On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 13:34 +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Em 13-12-2009 12:44, Philip Van Hoof escreveu: Richard's claim that proprietary is illegitimate is enforcement. He's making a philosophic mistake that contradicts his own ideology of free choice. Choice of the master

Re: Private Foundation-List Petition for referendum

with open source. But openness does have value, so I'd prefer not to limit access to this list. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 13:11 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote: Hi Vincent, Le vendredi 15 janvier 2010, à 13:02 +0100, Philip Van Hoof a écrit : I also hope the foundation board will respect the results of these surveys. What do you mean? I don't (didn't) mean any immediate action is needed. I

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 14:38 +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote: Hi Xavier, On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 13:02 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: I disrespect people who claim that this last survey has intentional bias. For me they are being intellectually dishonest. Giving one definition of a word, Lefty

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:37 -0500, john palmieri wrote: On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: The results are more than enlightening to me. The surveys definitely are useful and insightful. They sharply illustrate that open source

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

. The survey's results are open for everybody so this ain't a secret anyway: There's about twice the uptake for the term open source software as there is for free software. If the board respects the results of the survey, which I think it should do, it takes this into account. -- Philip Van

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 08:58 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote: On 1/15/10 8:49 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: Hi Stormy! I fully agree with this statement if you replace free software with open source. I have some sympathy with this view. Open source is my preference as well

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

discussions. I agree, apologizes for the labelling. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 18:05 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 08:58 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote: On 1/15/10 8:49 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: Hi Stormy! Mistake, I was replying to Lefty. Sorry Lefty. You know I like your féminin side ;) I fully agree

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

is far from only a free software community. This the GNOME foundation should be unambiguously clear about in its statements and texts. In my opinion. Cheers, -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

that it takes up its responsibility for their decisions. Especially for the ones when they ignore the opinion of most of its members: they better be right when they do that. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

, and explanations of why software freedom is valuable. As the GNOME community's values have a strong ethical ground, I question the necessity of the FSF's philosophical help. I believe the insinuation that we do is misplaced. [CUT] -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

be better if ..., you say that's great! nice job! And then the next time you say how about if you try xyz this time? Thank you Stormy, this is a great point of view. You really understood what people like me and Lefty want to point out. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me

Re: GNOME Foundation and CEO Goals

that will issue from it. Yes, this survey is very useful. Thanks a lot for this, Stormy. I hope the survey results will be made available soon. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Survey: GUADEC and Akadamy co-location in 2011

-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list

Re: Survey: GUADEC and Akadamy co-location in 2011

? Cheers, Thanks for the overview of events, Dave -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list

Re: New GNOME Foundation Members

of new members so much nicer. Is this possible please, or will I have to complain about this again in six months? Why don't we ask the new members to give a short introduction themselves? -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome

Re: New GNOME Foundation Members

On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 13:31 +0100, Ruben Vermeersch wrote: On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 13:24 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 11:45 +0100, Ruben Vermeersch wrote: On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:31 -0300, Bruno Boaventura wrote: Dear membership committee, Could you

Re: New GNOME Foundation Members

On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 15:02 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Philip Van Hoof wrote: Okay, that's easy to solve. We just make it a requirement for becoming a foundation member. And we document this requirement on the live pages and in a welcome mail. If they don't introduce themselves, we

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

in their call for papers. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

ranting anti virtual machine people comes along. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 18:38 +0200, Claudio Saavedra wrote: El mar, 23-02-2010 a las 17:02 +0100, Philip Van Hoof escribió: Hey Claudio, On 23/02/10 12:36, Alberto Ruiz wrote: I often hear complaints about how the RedHat guys turn down patches from other contributors (mostly from

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

of work on GTK+: no matter how you look at it, GTK+'s innovation is stalled. To the point that it gets ridiculous. If that statement takes all of my karma, whatever karma means, then it does. So be it. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 09:03 +, Martyn Russell wrote: On 23/02/10 22:52, Philip Van Hoof wrote: On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 16:53 +, Martyn Russell wrote: Hi Martyn, Don't be confused: most of this reply isn't directed at you personally. Sure, but I will indulge all the same ;) That's

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

the mess. That doesn't mean I always advocate starting over. But I think GNOME needs a new perspective for next few years: Technology is changing. Perspectives are changing. And we'd be missing the train in a big way if we let mobile slip (as we are, atm). Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

that makes it as easy to create visually attractive apps as it is on Mac Great proposals, yes. [CUT] Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

relevance of GTK+ and GNOME in future, I think it should be held at the level of GNOME. It also concerns far more than just GTK+ itself. But people might have different opinions on that. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

with the GNOME desktop! Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

Facebook for unlimited time. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

to name an example). Talking forever about what GNOME should be and expecting for someone to follow that direction is not going to effectively change anything. Sure it does. Thank you. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 19:48 -0500, Diego Escalante Urrelo wrote: Hey Diego, El dom, 28-02-2010 a las 00:49 +0100, Philip Van Hoof escribió: On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 21:32 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: [cut] I wish you and the FSF would focus more on user rights and licensing of (meta)data

Re: pvanhoof issue (was: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap)

to know who in the the hell made him the GNOME developers' representative and be able to tell others what I know and need? Saying that we don't need lessons morality is extremely insulting to you? (that's all I said) Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 17:39 -0700, Stormy Peters wrote: 2010/3/2 Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org Stop dragging the GNOME Foundation list down these off topic roads and stop this pissing contest. I think you, and many other people, are misinterpreting

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

with me? 3) And how wasn't it? If it wasn't. Why aren't you answering those questions? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

it's quite outdated now. Perhaps a team should step in to bring the sources of that book up to date, and get it republished? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

like this. I think gnome-build was created back then, and GtkSourceView's origin can probably also be traced back to that period? Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

GNOME's development experience. Thanks. Now on to the answer of your question: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:07 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote: I hope you guys really don't write the XML by hand now.) No, Glade-3, GtkBuilder or the integration in Anjuta I would make one small point: I still have

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

and the bug about TLS encryption support is *very* promising and going in the right direction, I think. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=588189 Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:32 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 11:08 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote: We debaters should decrease our traffic on this mailing list No. Stubborn people who insist on having the last word should stop pointless arguments. It's bad enough when people

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

avoided inheriting dumb latency heavy models and they don't have the compatibility legacy that GNOME has to worry about in solving them. OK Thanks for your very informative reply, Alan. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 08:15 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote: Philip Van Hoof wrote: Doing some more [CUT]ing. In other words: UI and client developers should learn to build state machines instead of threads that work like (where [...] is ~ an IP frame): [ask], wait, [receive], process

Re: Meeting Minutes Published - March 18, 2010

in GNOME is the same in this regard, so please also follow it. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof freelance software developer Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org

Re: Speaker Guidelines

the guideline away or don't be a member. A clear position makes happy people. Happy people contribute more. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof freelance software developer Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list

Re: Fwd: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

is your responsibility, not Lefty's. It would even be impolite if he'd have forwarded a private reply from you to him unto a public mailing list. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof freelance software developer Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be

Re: How about creating addons.gnome.org

I guess open means open source as defined here: http://www.opensource.org/ (fair enough?) Cheers, Philip -- Philip Van Hoof freelance software developer Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list

  1   2   >