On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 11:43, Daniel James wrote: > > Is there any chance you'd postpone it and announce the project and > > the beta site on lad for further discussing before launching it? > > No. As I've already explained, my view is that membership of a > particular mailing list does not confer veto rights over any project > that happens to have the words Linux and Audio in its name. > > > Unfortunately, not much people did know about it, except those > > you've contacted. > > er... perhaps that's because I haven't made the initial public > announcement yet, which will go out tomorrow. I've been working on > this for less than two weeks, and some things take a few days to > prepare.
I could help with that. I didn't know about that. > > > there are lots of people who would like to > > contribute to such project and lots of people with great ideas on > > how to move on. It's just different when you make decisions on your > > own. > > We obviously have very different ideas about project management. Where > would the Linux kernel be if Linus hadn't started it by himself? (not > that I'm comparing my technical ability to Linus's for one moment.) > The alternative is to pre-announce the project, then form a committee > to discuss the issues for 20 years or more - examples would be > Xanadu, or GNU Hurd, or the lean and stable version of Windows. > > I know from experience with libre software, wireless networks and many > other areas that it's all very well talking about a project, but if > there isn't one or two people to actually do the work then it won't > happen. You can call it leadership if you like, but I'm not out to > found a dictatorship here. I just happen to be the only person who > bothered registering the domain name and committed to seeing the > project through to launch. > > > Discussion is what shapes a project > > No, action shapes a project. Discussion without action is just a > pressure wave in air. > > > The problem is that we should follow > > basic principles of democracy. This didn't happen. > > I think you're pre-judging an organisation that hasn't even launched > yet. If you read the Policy page of the website, you'll see I have > deliberately set up an organisation with a management board made up > of members representatives, which oversees the Director. > > > Did any voting > > happen? > > Not yet. > > > Any discussion? > > Yes. > > > You have obeyed lots of lad members by not > > asking them. > > I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean here. > > > My intention was based on following principles: > > > > 1. inform about plans, ideas > > 2. discuss, try to form conclusions > > 3. take action > > You've still got time to take action. > > > Seems like you'd like to go the other way around. > > Actually, I don't see project management working in such a linear > fashion. There has to be 1, 2 and 3 happening in parallel. > > > The problem is that the name 'linux audio' actually *represents* > > both the linux audio developer community and the linux audio user > > community > > Not at all. Neither linux.com or linux.org have any special status in > the Linux community - they're just domain names. > > > both meet at a common place which is the lad or lau > > mailing list. It's where the discussion takes place > > But not the action? > > > Second problem is to find a way for new users and developers to > > find everything they need related to linux audio *and* to make it a > > meeting point, or even provide necessary resources to help new > > audio projects grow. > > Personally, I saw little value in replicating the work of existing > sites, or creating an all-encompassing portal. Exactly, 'personally' is your problem. > > > > The key is the name of the domain. It's > > www.linuxaudio.org. > > Not any more, I'm afraid. If you wanted that domain name six months > ago you should have registered it then. It doesn't matter who registers the site. > > > The problem is lots of people won't find what > > they actually wanted to find on such place. > > Until a couple of weeks ago there was nothing at all there, so I hope > this site will be an improvement. > > > The consortium isn't the most necesary solution that will boost > > linux audio > > I disagree. If you don't want to co-operate, you are free to start a > better project. > > > it's not something people might find interesting > > if they want to know about linux audio. > > The new user might be better off at other sites, it's true. > linux-sound.org or djcj.org already exist. > > > It's > > 1. providing information, > > 2. providing a meeting place for devs and users, > > 3. providing necesary resources, similar to sf.net > > That's your project, not mine. No-one is stopping you doing that. > > > the members should be *natural persons*, lad > > members, and the organisation should be focused on the *community*, > > not on companies. > > Again, you're talking about a different project. As for companies, who > do you think employs members of the community to work on Linux audio? > Linuxaudio.org gives libre software projects and companies equal > status - that's pretty rare for an industry body. > > > The > > organisation should exist to protect the interests of the LAD > > community. > > As defined by yourself? Are you kidding me? Who's the one taking action? Did i suggest to take a look at xiph foundation or gnome foundation...? > All I'm trying to do here is bring people > together for mutual benefit, be they manufacturers, developers, or > users. > > > That's why i *strongly* suggest - let's postpone it. Let's > > discuss it. Let's make a decision at ZKM LAD meeting 2004 :) > > I can't do that now. You're demanding veto power again. ?? > > > But a formal org. has no meaning if it isn't governed by law. > > Plenty of important Linux-related organisations aren't legal entities. > If it proves necessary later, we can go down that path. > > > How > > should it act and protect the interests of lad community? > > We'll find out after the launch. > > > time to start a organisation - a foundation consisting > > of lad members. > > If you look at the current membership list you'll see they mostly are > LAD members already. > > > The question is not whether it's > > *yours* or *mine*. > > I'm afraid it is, because you're trying to impose your decisions on > me. > > > The point is that it's an *acknowledged* place > > Yes, for discussion among developers - Linuxaudio.org is both > different and complementary to the LAD list. > > > every little thign > > happened to be discussed there, teh name of jack, the logo of lad, > > the content of www.linuxaudiodev.org site, the LAD meetings etc and > > i'm just mentioning thing which aren't related to coding > > That's hardly everything. Let me be explicit about the limitations of > the current set-up. > > 1. Generally, very poor relations between hardware manufacturers and > LAD community. You'd think that anyone writing a driver, or otherwise > offering gratis support for the audio hardware of a particular > manufacturer, would be welcomed with open arms. Not so - hackers > can't even get full specs sometimes, let alone technical partnership > or 'free as in beer' test kit. > > 2. Fragmentation - what organisation there is, is informal. Companies > that want to have better relations with the LAD community don't know > where to start. Result - those companies aren't taking Linux based > audio products to the mainstream. Also see 1. above. Do you think they will - without any users? > > 3. Developers are busy. They don't always have the time or skills to > do advocacy, write articles for magazines or organise public events. > The result is that advocacy just isn't being done as much as it could > be. Linux has been around more than a decade, but it hasn't been > until this year that we'll see the first appearance of libre software > at audio industry trade shows. > > If the linuxaudio.org project intends to have official status, then > > you should *first* take LAD and ZKM conference seriously > > I do. They have a certain amount of natural authority. > > > as > > something with official status. > > You're just wrong here. They have no official status which allows them > to dictate how advocacy is done - neither do you. So you do have official status then? > > > By not doing that, you're actually completely careless about the > > entire LAD community. > > I think you're just complaining because you feel like the last to know > > - even though it doesn't even launch until tomorrow. In the > pre-launch phase, I've discussed linuxaudio.org with every LAD member > that I know. > > > So how come you're the director of a consortium before lots of > > linux audio people know about it > > Lots of Linux audio people do know about it. The reason I made myself > the director is that someone has to take responsibility, and put in > the hours of unpaid work it requires to launch the project. If you > read the Policy page you'll see that the director has to answer to > the management board, which means I can easily be replaced after the > launch. > > > a director of a consortium > > which you wouldn't even think of if those people didn't develop > > such apps? > > I took this unpaid job on because no-one else was doing it. Did you ask anybody? Any voting? > So far, > I'm funding linuxaudio.org out of my own pocket. I'm quite aware of > the fundamental contribution of libre software developers to the > systems I use, which is why they have equal weight with companies on > the linuxaudio.org management board. Sorry but 'equal' just isn't the right word for it, 95% vs. 5% would be. > > > Woudln't it be better if those people we're acting in > > such position? > > LAD members have had plenty of time to set up an organisation of this > nature, and none of them have. What does that tell you? What should it tell me? > > > Are you sure you're protecting the interests of the > > community? > > Quite sure. Now please stop trolling and make a positive contribution. Sorry. I didn't know that criticism = trolling for you. > > Cheers > > Daniel James > Director > http://linuxaudio.org > > Marek
