On Thursday 06 August 2009, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > On Wednesday 05 Aug 2009 7:47:33 pm Venkatesh Hariharan wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > We are indeed going in circles. In an earlier mail on 30th June I made > > > a point that we cannot go against the zeroth principle. Since of you > > > joined late, please follow the mail, and the thread from the archives. > > > > > > http://lists.fosscom.in/pipermail/network-fosscom.in/2009-June/000269.h > > >tm l > > > > Nagarjuna I agree 100 percent with your mail in the link above. I feel > > we should keep the CMP aside for the time being. > > -1. So we are back to the mixture as before, with 90% of the community and > practically all outside players outside fosscomm.
We are not. There are no stats available whatsoever. We are just making assumptions based on our personal views. We agree that we require to be broad based. 1) Most insiders agree that Software Patents are to be opposed. 2) We agree that the government must be made to use FLOSS for e-governance. 3) We agree that Open unencumbered standards are a must. 4) We agree that FLOSS must be used in ICT Given the last three (especially 3) , i dont see how we can reconcile to a different stance on 1. So the CMP (in no particular order) for now Could be 1) Engage various ICT agencies for using FLOSS. 2) Engage the government for enforcing the use of FLOSS in e-Governance. 3) Engage the government in enforcing Open unencumbered standards and avoid multiple standards in IT software and hardware. 4) As a corollary of the above two campaign against Software patents. 5) Enlist members who support one or more of the above. As an immediate requirement began formation of a formal body. Setup membership rules. Commence enrolment process. -- Rgds JTD _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
