On Mar 3, 2011, at 8:34 AM, Randall Arnold wrote: > > > > >> ----- Original message ----- >> From: "Foster, Dawn M" <[email protected]> >> To: "Mark Constable" <[email protected]> >> cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [MeeGo-community] Community Device Program - Intel contribution >> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:08:29 -0800 >> >> >> >> On Mar 3, 2011, at 7:29 AM, Mark Constable wrote: >> >>> On 04/03/11, Foster, Dawn M wrote: >>>>> Personally speaking, I would much rather click on a Paypal >>>>> button than "waste" any amount of time spent on a form applying >>>>> for a device that I will probably never get (in my case). >>>> >>>> I'm curious why you assume that you wouldn't be eligible to >>>> receive devices? The eligibility criteria on the wiki isn't >>>> particularly extensive. >>> >>> Because I haven't made any tangible contributions to MeeGo and >>> there are probably a heap of folks more deserving. However, I >>> need a MeeGo touch enabled device now, or sooner than latter. >>> >> >> So this is a good point. At this point in the project, there are probably >> a lot of developers, for example, who haven't *yet* made significant >> contributions to MeeGo, since the project is still relatively new. >> But, those developers might be interested in doing something really >> cool or in porting an application from another device over to MeeGo. >> >> I wonder if we should relax this requirement: "Have a record of >> meaningful contribution to the MeeGo project" to make it a preference. >> Something like, "People with a record of meaningful contribution to the >> MeeGo project are preferred." >> >> Any thoughts? >> > > Early on in this discussion the requirement was somewhat looser. We had > talked about developers with really innovative ideas (and the demonstrated > ability to bring them about). In fact that was specifically what TI had > proposed for Pandaboard giveaways. > > Obviously requirements will be on a per-device and/or per-provider basis, and > I would encourage every provider to have some flexibility and variability in > their requirements, ie, a list of different ways to qualify. The only > drawback I can see with preference placed on MeeGo history is that it *can* > lead to the sort of situation Mark was concerned about, where certain members > are repeatedly benefitting. So I would add the caveat that we need to track > handouts and try to prevent or at least minimize multiple awards. > Good point, I've removed the requirement of previous contributions from the general program requirements. If a vendor wants to limit it based on previous contributions, they can add it to the vendor requirements. I'll leave the description in the form because it does provide additional background information for the selection committee.
Dawn _______________________________________________ MeeGo-community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-community http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
