Re: [guadec-list] Registration for GUADEC 2019 is now open!
Hey Kristi, On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 11:07 +0200, Kristi Progri wrote: > Hi again, > > There was a misunderstanding on the meals package; it costs 55 EUR > which covers the lunches for the 3 main days. > Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks in advance for your > understanding. Could you explain why the catering is so expensive? That comes to about 18€ a meal, which is pretty expensive for any type of university accommodation (or even a brasserie somewhere in a touristy part of Paris for that matter). I also noticed that the "free" registration option went away. Is that on purpose? Cheers [1]: "give what you can" option with recommended amounts ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GUADEC 2018 call for bids
On Fri, 2017-03-17 at 13:46 -0700, Nuritzi Sanchez wrote: > Hi all, > > The GNOME Foundation would like to invite bids for hosting GUADEC > 2018. > > GUADEC is the biggest gathering of GNOME users and developers, which > takes place in Europe every year, and you could make it happen next > year! > > If you are interested in submitting a bid, you can talk to the > Foundation Board and previous GUADEC organizers to find out more > about what is involved. > > The deadline for bid submission will be the 4th of June by e-mail to > foundation-announce gnome org and board-list gnome org. Bids should > also be uploaded to https://wiki.gnome.org/GUADEC/2018/Bids. Do you mind if I remove the date for the "Intentions to bid" in the Wiki? I'm guessing it's not needed or used as it's not mentioned in the mail. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GUADEC 2017 Manchester bid
On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Sam Thursfield wrote: > Hello > > I'm happy to present our bid to put on the 2017 edition of GUADEC in > Manchester, UK. You can download it as a PDF from here: > http://afuera.me.uk/files/guadec2017-manchester-bid.pdf > > We have met some really helpful while putting together this bid, both > at the Manchester Metropolitan University, which is our proposed > venue, and at the Marketing Manchester conference bureau, who have > helped make the bid document. Thanks to both. > > That said, we will need more help to make the conference happen! > Manchester has several free software groups and has a huge number of > software & technology enthusiasts so I'm confident we can put > together > a larger local team, but please don't hesitate to get in touch now if > you are UK-based and would be willing to help with the organisation > of > the conference! > > One aspect which we would need to sort out early on is how to handle > funds for the event (i.e. whose bank account to use). We would save a > lot of money in tax if the money was handled by a charity, but we > don't know of any suitable free-software related UK charities to > approach about this. Any pointers would be welcome. We could also set > up a new charity for the conference, but it would be nicer to spend > bureaucracy Tried FLOSSUK (né UKUUG)? Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board Meeting of October, 06th, 2015
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:35 +0100, Andrea Veri wrote: > = Minutes for Tuesday, October 6th, 2015, 19:00 UTC = > > Next meeting date Tuesday, October 13th, 2015, 19:00UTC > > == Attending == > > * Shaun McCance > * Rosanna Yuen > * Cosimo Cecchi > * Allan Day > * Ekaterina Gerasimova > * Jeff F. T. > > == Regrets == > > * Andrea Veri > > == Missing == When is the board replacing Christian Hergert? Replacements are nominated by the Board, and don't have to be the highest voter runner-up, or even one of the candidates. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for speakers for hacknight in Gothenburg on Aug 11th
On Mon, 2015-07-20 at 19:41 +, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: snip Are the ones that come to mind. Maybe Bastien Nocera has some hardware related type talk that he could talk about? I'm afraid I won't be in town any more by that time. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: [OT] Re: You logo
On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 16:50 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 07:03 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: You're consistently calling out people on their imprecision when using Linux instead of GNU/Linux, yet you seem to often spell GNOME in an incorrect manner. GNOME is our trademark and it's spelled in caps. I know you usually pay attention to details, so I'd appreciate if you could pay attention to this one as well. Thank you. I will try to remember. Note that I'm not the only person who has posted messages saying Gnome. Yeah, but you are the only person on this list constantly requesting to please put a GNU/ prefix in front of the word Linux no matter what the actual topic of the corresponding thread is, creating uninteresting noise for basically everybody on this mailing list who know already anyway except for the original poster and maybe two more folks. Unfortunately your on-topic postings can be quite interesting and insightful, so I don't want to ignore just all of your emails. But as you expect others to be highly interested in spelling details (you are very free to disagree on my choice of words here), you might be expected to put in the same amount of efforts. I've had a rather short discussion with the list moderators, and, when I mentioned that we should filter out mails containing clippy-style I think you mean GNU/Linux, I was told: I'm strongly against censoring people's mails. I would argue that one's freedom stops where other people's start. I shouldn't have to put with this type of trolling on GNOME lists. So I'm leaving this list. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board Meeting of January, 09th, 2015
On 27 Jan 2015, at 00:11, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote: * GNOME Privacy project (what to do with the remaining funds): hackfest? internships? Hmm, remaining? Was some of the money spent already? What was it spent on? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME and Ubuntu GNOME
On Sat, 2014-09-27 at 20:24 +1000, Tim wrote: On 27/09/14 12:48, Michael Catanzaro wrote: Some related advice: stop shipping different versions of GNOME software in the same release. For example, Ubuntu GNOME 14.04 includes gnome-shell 3.10, gnome-settings-daemon 3.8, and gnome-control-center 3.6. None of those are designed to work together: that's why you have control center panels displayed as if they were applications in the overview, and it's surely causing other bugs as well (I heard that suspend options were broken?). Some of the panels in 3.6 were actual separate applications from memory. They never were in GNOME 3. Another: you have the Desktop folder displaying in the Places menu on nautilus sidebar; gnome-settings-daemon is supposed to tell GTK+ not to show that, but your gnome-settings-daemon is too old. That is a pretty minor issue, and its certainly not by our choice that gnome-settings-daemon is outdated. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME and Ubuntu GNOME
On Sat, 2014-09-27 at 20:32 -0400, Liam R E Quin wrote: On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 08:57:19 -0500 Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: [...] Whereas the versions of your applications can probably vary without TOO much trouble, you should only ever update core components like gnome-shell, gnome-settings-daemon, and gnome-control-center at the same time. gnome-tweak-tool is another one where something is likely to break if not upgraded in lockstep. How could they be made more robust against this sort of problem? By fixing the packages to not accept mixed versions. These communicate over unstable D-Bus interfaces and assume they're communicating with the corresponding version of the other components. Why don't they ask, and refuse to run if they depend on the other parts so closely. But in that case what's the advantage of using dbus? It's already a pain for users that things like themes and shell extensions are so closely tied to the gnome-shell version, but at least they just refuse to load rather than breaking in unpredictable ways. It doesn't break in unpredictable ways. It breaks in very very predictable ways. We build and release GNOME components together because they work together. gnome-settings-daemon 3.14 for example implements the necessary backend for the per-network sharing in the Sharing panel. Making the latter check for versions would mean an explosion of the test matrix (it would need to check for versions of gnome-settings-daemon, gnome-user-share, rygel and vino). If you choose to mix'n'match without thorough QA, you're going to end keeping both pieces. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Agenda for board meeting on September 26th
On Tue, 2014-09-30 at 15:24 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] So, this is a bit annoying already. snip * Free software. Many web sites require visitors to run nonfree software to use some or even all of the functionality. See http://gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html. Does Bountysource work without nonfree JS? I don't know, but one can't presume that. Their JS is opensource Whether a program is open source is not the pertinent question. What matters is whether it is free software. snip heard many times before tirade about Open Source vs. Free Software The proletysing has to stop. He's a GNU orthodox thinking we're complete idiots of Roman GNUs. I've asked the mailing-list moderator to handle that already, but they won't lift a finger. Either he leaves, or I'm out of this mailing-list. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: OPW; Where does the 500$ for each GSoC goes?
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 10:28 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 16:07 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: I'm sure you're confusing me with somebody else. I don't live in the US, I only work for a US company. I live in the UK. Whoops; I was thinking that Endless is based in San Francisco. Of the people working on GNOME, most Red Hat employees don't work from Raleigh, most Intel employees don't work from Portland, most GNOME Foundation employees don't work from San Francisco. The Internet, hey? :) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Mission Statement
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 18:34 +0100, Allan Day wrote: Second, OPW has been beneficial for GNOME. It has raised our profile and further established our role as leaders in the Free Software world. Our sponsors are enthusiastic about OPW (conversely, moving OPW out of GNOME would give them one less reason to support us). While that was true when it was limited to participation in GNOME itself, that's not the case anymore. All of the branding is now FossOPW: https://wiki.gnome.org/OutreachProgramForWomen And reading a blog post like this: http://sarah.thesharps.us/2013/05/23/%EF%BB%BF%EF%BB%BFopw-update/ it feels like it wasn't people in GNOME that came up with programme, but that GNOME was just the first organisation to benefit from it (see What is the FOSS Outreach Program for Women). ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Mission Statement
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 14:24 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] Do you understand that the many -isms that negatively impact GNOME and open source in general If you want to talk about the larger practice that GNOME is part of, please speak of free software. 1. Please get yourself a mailer that doesn't mangle Máirín's name, there are plenty of Free Software ones 2. If the extent of your involvement in the GNOME Foundation's life is going to be something that a bot can replace, can we please have the bot instead? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Mission Statement
On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 15:13 -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: On 08/07/2014 03:02 PM, Allan Day wrote: While the interpretation isn't quite right, that blog post talks about GNOME and does so positively. It's giving us good exposure. Maybe GNOME's logo should appear under sponsors on gnome.org/opw too. GNOME appearing under the Sponsors and/or Partners sections would help, so would emphasizing GNOME's role in the About section. (The GNOME Foundation started the Outreach Program for Women[...]. It was inspired by [...]). Ditto for the flyer at https://wiki.gnome.org/OutreachProgramForWomen as well as the similarly worded origins section. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Can a foundation member have access to the sponsorship history?
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 09:27 +0200, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote: snip With or without a good reason, you took the non-polite way to answer. Why? I don't know, seriously. When discussing such matters, you'll want to take out the sarcasm (which you've applied in a few of your answers, it really doesn't help). Furthermore, you've said that [you] *strongly* imply that the board and the travel committee are corrupt. You better come up with proofs of that before carrying on this conversation. Having been on the board, I can assure you that preferential treatment does not equate to corruption. I put preferential treatment in quotes because that's what it might look like from an outside point of view, especially if you've been refused sponsorship for an event. But the fact is that somebody who's been in the community for longer, or that's already delivered higher-level talks about the project's direction, or that's delivered very successful talks is more likely to get sponsorship than a person that doesn't have that history. So, why do you think the travel committee and the Board are corrupt? Did you or a friend of yours get denied sponsorship? Did you ask for the reason for refusal? Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Questions to candidates (financing aids alternative priorities)
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 02:40 +0200, Andrés G. Aragoneses wrote: Hello, Sorry for the delay, I know the elections already started... but apparently they questions can still be sent, so here I have two: - In regards to finances, I've read that much of the problem is actually about the overhead and paperwork of administrative tasks about the accounts with regards to tracking income and controlling/approving expenses. So I'm wondering: do you think trying to start moving some of these processes (in which inevitably one has to deal with banks and receipts) to the use of a cryptocurrency would make things easier and more transparent? I know that maybe this space is a bit immature right now, but there's already many merchants accepting it, and using it to send pay-outs to developers (for their expenses) would allow avoiding PayPal fees, and could help maybe streamline some processes? This was already answered in previous e-mails. tl;dr is we can't, unless we really fancy being audited by the IRS. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Voting instructions missing?
Hey, http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.foundation.announce/629 says: The Electorate will receive complete instructions on how to vote by 2014-05-25 via email. Should I be worried that I did not receive anything? Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board of Directors Elections 2014 - Candidacy - Emily Gonyer
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 07:24 -0400, Emily Gonyer wrote: Yes, you're part of the community. But you're being paid by a large corporation to work on it, and as a result are beholden to them at least as much as to the rest of the community. Red Hat is not the only thing that matters in the GNOME world. Or, it shouldn't be. Why do you think it is the only thing that matters? What gives you that impression? But for the last several years, Red Hat's wants/needs have trumped what anyone else wants/needs, Are you saying that Red Hat employees mostly worked on features that Red Hat thought were important to GNOME? That's hardly a surprise, but I'd be interested to know why you think it should it be any different. If you refer to particular technical decisions, such as our shift towards systemd, I think the events of recent months have proven us right. If you're talking about some new features that might appear useless to you, note that there will always be others for which those features are important. (I've actually read that people thought the Wacom tablet integration wasn't something we should have been working on. Turns out we now have the best Wacom integration across any platform, even proprietary ones, and it's pushing designers towards using GNOME). including the larger user base of GNOME which is what (I believe) has driven it to fracture into so many DE's over the last 3-4 years. We need to make sure that people who aren't working for Red Hat have a say. Make sure that people who aren't being paid to work on free software have a voice. Sure, those of us who are not currently paid can speak up on mailing lists, but we're (mostly) roundly ignored. This is what has driven the community apart. This is the problem. That's because GNOME is a meritocracy. You don't get to steer GNOME's development simply by saying something on IRC or a mailing-list. You need to actually do. And there are plenty of community members and non-Red Hat employees that actually do, a lot of them working on both core desktop infrastructure and some of our new applications. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for candidates
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 23:35 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] To cooperate formally with a Linux Foundation event would run into a problem -- they would probably want to call the GNU/Linux system Linux, and we should not accept that. I look forward to the FSF's financial contributions to GNOME conferences. The truth is not for sale. GNOME was launched by the GNU Project to be part of the GNU system. That system is still GNU, and calling it Linux is bad for GNU, including GNOME. Care to expand on that? Miguel's history of the GNOME project doesn't make a lot of mention of GNU: https://web.archive.org/web/20131106035732/http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/gnome-history.html Namely, a discussion with you about his plans, the use of GNU licenses, and an announcement on a GNU mailing-list. What else did the GNU project and/or the FSF do for GNOME? One thing that it could do though, is update the screenshot of some ancient version of GNOME on the front page: http://www.gnu.org/ Where the stock GNOME logo used for the menu has been replaced by some sort of Celtic knot. I'd definitely want the GNOME Foundation Board to accept one of its sponsors using Linux I agree, but that is a different subject. We were talking about holding GUADEC in combination with a Linux Foundation event -- not about merely accepting sponsorship. Guess I wasn't clear enough for you, and I'll rephrase so it's clearer: I'd definitely want the GNOME Foundation Board to accept co-hosting an event with one of its sponsors that uses Linux and not GNU/Linux if it meant the durability of those GNOME conferences. They support Free Software as well. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board of Directors Elections 2014 - Candidacy - Emily Gonyer
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 09:30 -0400, Emily Gonyer wrote: In regards to paid and unpaid contributors to GNOME, I honestly feel that unpaid contributions should be favored. I realize that is probably unlikely to occur, but it ought to. Why? Because GNOME is, at least in theory, a free software 'project'. As such, it is supposedly run, and worked on largely by volunteers. That's (fortunately) incorrect. Unfortunately of course, we all know this is not true. In practice most of the top contributors are paid to work on GNOME - as a result, most of their work is directed by corporations, I find that incredibly insulting, especially as it's the second time you say this. I'm paid to work on GNOME, and like most of my colleagues working on GNOME, I was a GNOME contributor before being paid to work on it. Suggesting that we don't have GNOME's best interests at heart is just hurtful, and incorrect. and their wants/needs and not by the thousands of individual users who have different wants/needs. But because they are paid to work on it, they have more time to do so and rise faster and receive more respect and admiration than those of us who do so 'just for fun'. This creates a lopsided portrait of the wants/needs of users. And, of course, the corporations who are paying for the work don't care what individual users think - why would they? And you really think that those evil corporations would manage to make us make changes to GNOME that we think would be detrimental to GNOME as a project? Do you want me to assign those remarks to ignorance or malice? As a result, users are ignored and the larger free software community alienated. This is, IMHO why the GNOME ecosystem has fractured so fully over the last couple of years. Where we once had GNOME we now have GNOME Shell, Unity, Elementary, Cinnamon and Mate all competing for the same handful of users. I'm not going to pretend that I know how to fix this problem. I don't. But I do know it exists, and that it has been largely, if not completely ignored by the majority of GNOME developers and certainly by the Board of Directors thus far. Perhaps most striking is the very composition of the Board of Directors itself. How many are not paid to work on GNOME by an Advisory Board member? Isn't this in some way a conflict of interest? Shouldn't the board be independent and not tied to corporate interests? Shouldn't the needs of the project come first, and not the needs of any individual corporation? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova kittykat3...@gmail.com wrote: On 20 May 2014 12:10, Emily Gonyer emilyyr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova kittykat3...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Emily, On 17 May 2014 19:42, Emily Gonyer emilyyr...@gmail.com wrote: Name: Emily Gonyer Email: emilyyr...@gmail.com Affiliation: None Dear Foundation, I'm interested in serving on GNOME's board of directors for the first time, in order to help steer GNOME in a more open and community led direction. It is my opinion that GNOME has strode too far towards a corporate-driven project and away from its community-led roots. As of now, GNOME is, in my opinion too beholden to a small handful of large corporations which forces the project to ignore large swaths of our users in preference to them. The end result being that GNOME has lost a tremendous portion of its respect and goodwill in the wider free software community. As a member of the GNOME board of directors I will actively work against this tide and towards the more open, community-driven project that GNOME once was and I hope will be again. I understand your concerns with regards to corporate involvement in the project direction. Based on the available financial information, the corporate sponsorship enables the Foundation to employ an executive director and an administrative assistant. Without this sponsorship, much of the administrative work would need to be taken over by the Foundation membership and the current board is already facing the challenges resulting from having only one employee at this time. How do you aim to achieve your goals without alienating the companies that enable the Foundation to have employees to do the administrative work and offer financial support to our membership? GNOME is Free software, with a broad base of unpaid and paid contributors. It seems that you wish to change the proportions of GNOME contributors from the two backgrounds, how do you aim to achieve this? I think we need to take a good, hard look at what we're spending money on and evaluate what is truly needed vs wanted. Once we figure out how much money we need to be spending, we can evaluate our current funds, where they are coming from and how to raise more. This information is publicly available for up to the end of 2013 at
Re: About possible participation in Rest the Net campaign
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 20:24 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 00:33 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: snip (It'd also be a bit silly to run a $2 privacy campaign and then not participate in this, but I guess there are real disadvantages to abusing SSL: increased power costs, correct?) We don't pay the power costs (even if they would exist with SSL). I imaging that the problem is rather the cost of administration. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: question for candidates
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 10:32 +0200, Andreas Nilsson wrote: On 05/21/2014 05:17 AM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: Now regarding foundation and these other projects. I've long thought that need to find a way to support these projects. I have a proposal in the works that will suggest that the Foundation will help pay for hackfests that does not benefit GNOME the product (e.g. the desktop) but does benefit GNOME the eco-system. The idea is that in exchange for the money, that everyone would participate in working in the lower levels of the stack and not necessarily the design. This is controversial because of using our finances, but there are questions on whether this will dilute the brand. But that is a separate discussion. This is very interesting, considering projects like Mate and Elementary OS have donation systems by themselves and I assume income from that [1] [2]. The other thing is that the foundation have limited funds as it is. I would love to hear other candidates view on this matter. It would be a deal breaker for me. In the past, we would try to sponsor GNOME folks for hackfests that are wider than GNOME itself, and in some cases, important people in the community around those building blocks. For example, the location hackfest, built around work on Geoclue2, has plenty of non-GNOME attendees: https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/Location2014 I believe it also happened for the Color management hackfest: https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/ColorManagement2012 Obviously, it's better when the contributor's home organisation can pay for costs rather than GNOME. It might not always be the case however. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: question for candidates
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 17:08 -0400, Emily Gonyer wrote: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Andy Tai a...@gnu.org wrote: Hi, I would like to post this question to the candidates: GNOME's core toolkit, gtk+, is used by numerous projects. Currently gtk+ development seems to be driven mainly by the GNOME desktop. However, gtk+ also play critical roles in other free software projects, like MATE, XFCE, and the Cinnamon desktop, and large applications like GIMP, Inkscape, etc. What are your views on the participation of the people of these projects, as stake holders in the direction of gtk+, in the GNOME Foundation? Should the GNOME Foundation encourage (reach out to) these people to get them involved in the GNOME Foundation so they also have a say and even contribute to gtk+ so gtk+ can continue to serve their needs well, important for the continuing successes of gtk+ in the free software world? They are (or ought to be) just as involved in the development of GTK+ as the developers of GNOME Shell are, and their opinions, wants, needs etc ought to be valued. The GNOME project is not (or at least, should not) be exclusively about GNOME Shell, but include anyone and everyone who uses GNOME technologies. The sever fracturing of the community which has taken place over the last 3-4 years is not healthy for our community, nor for theirs. Everyone who is using GTK+ ought to be included in ongoing discussions as to its development. They should be invited to GUADEC and encouraged to submit talks, and become foundation members. As long as they contribute to GNOME or its direct eco-system (eg. contributing to MATE, Elementary, etc. isn't contributing to GNOME, contributing to GTK+, NetworkManager, PulseAudio or GStreamer is). As a member of the board, I will do my best to engage with them and encourage them to do so, while also doing my best to ensure that their voices, thoughts, concerns, etc are heard, understood and thought of in any and all changes going forwards. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for candidates
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 01:39 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: To cooperate formally with a Linux Foundation event would run into a problem -- they would probably want to call the GNU/Linux system Linux, and we should not accept that. I look forward to the FSF's financial contributions to GNOME conferences. I'd definitely want the GNOME Foundation Board to accept one of its sponsors using Linux if it meant the durability of those GNOME conferences. They support Free Software as well. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board of Directors Elections 2014 - Candidacy - Emily Gonyer
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 07:15 -0400, Emily Gonyer wrote: Of course people should be able to be paid to work on free software. That's great. But when one or two large companies pay the majority of developers, it becomes hard to argue that it is still a 'community led' project, let alone one which is independent. And that's where GNOME is right now. Are we (those paid contributors) not part of the community? Are non-paid volunteers the only ones that can be part of the community? I don't understand your answer here. On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:35 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote: On 21 May 2014 10:14, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: Suggesting that we don't have GNOME's best interests at heart is just hurtful, and incorrect. Agreed. I've never once been told by anyone at Red Hat to do something that I didn't think was in the best interests of GNOME as a project. Richard ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board Meeting of March 11th, 2014
On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 14:29 +0100, Luc Pionchon wrote: About privacy issues, On 24 March 2014 12:50, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20140311 * Privacy issues regarding GNOME Software statistics reporting * The GNOME Software statistics configuration moved to GNOME Control Center * https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=725912 * The change to send usage stats to distros by default was intentional I am very surprised to read the argument developed in [1]. Shouldn't GNOME preserve user's privacy far before serving distributor/vendor's interest? This is worrying. [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=725912#c2 * Bastien suggested this be explicitly asked/presented to users in GNOME Initial Setup I think that this is not enough: The user is not always the one who does the initial setup. Also the initial setup may have happened long ago, who will remember what he selected during initial setup? I think that the user must be informed at the same time when information is sent. Without having to dig into various settings. It could be, for example, a check box in GNOME Software with a label like: [x] send usage stats alongside the connection. or alike. Together with a link to the policy and details about what is actually sent. This would be clear and transparent, and would allow user to disable the service anytime, without any extra steps. You misread the bug report to say initial setup will be the only place where we'll ask that question. There will be a toggle in the Privacy panel obviously. And your argument is also pretty thin on the ground. The user didn't do the initial setup and the evil person who installed it is sending your software usage, in case the keylogger they installed isn't quite enough. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes for the Board meeting of February 18th, 2014
On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 22:49 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: hi Germán; On 4 March 2014 20:05, Germán Póo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 10:15 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20140218 = Minutes for Tuesday, February 18th, 2014, 16:00 UTC = == Next Meeting == * Tuesday, February 25th, 2014, 16:00 UTC [...] * The Board discussed the direction of the GNOME Foundation and possibilities for the future May any of the directors elaborate more about the outcome of this discussion? there is no outcome per se, right now, as the discussion is pretty much informal and still ongoing (as you may have noticed). some of the discussion was free flowing/mindstorming, some of it was rambling, some of it was more structured: engagement (internal and external), technical direction, fund raising, membership benefits, roles of the directors. Luis would have enjoyed the mindstorming ;) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 10:48 -0500, Emily Gonyer wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de wrote: Hi. On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 09:03:34AM -0500, Emily Gonyer wrote: And, once again, I have to ask, how much different does it have/need to be? I don't think any designer would want my advice as to how to make a logo. But I am very confident that minor modifications such as using the Ubuntu circle instead of a plain filled circle would make all of us happy. It is slightly different already, in Ubuntu's normal scheme for spinoffs - if you look at Xubuntu's logo its a solid circle with the XFCE mouse inside in relief I claim false facts. The XFCE logo seems to be this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Xfce_logo.png A full bodied, potentially running mouse in front of an X. The Xubuntu logo seems to be that one: http://xubuntu.org/wp-content/themes/xubuntu-theme/xubuntu-wp/images/xubuntu-logo.png It's a (probably the XFCE) mouse's head in a filled circle. So the logos differ. Kubuntu's is a solid circle with KDE's logo inside. The KDE logo http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Guidelines/CIG/KDE_Logo is a K gear. The Kubuntu logo http://www.kubuntu.org/themes/kubuntu10.04/logo.png has a split gear-wheel only. The K is missing. Thus, the logos differ. Alright. So how about this. We chop the toes off of the foot, so its not quite the same. Will that work for you? Don't use the unmodified GNOME logo as the logo for your GNOME based product That's hard? No, it's not. That'd work for me. I don't think it would look too good, but it would avoid using the unmodified GNOME logo. snip As Dave pointed out, back a few yrs ago, people who were using only portions of GNOME were happily included in the GNOME family. But now GNOME insists on drawing utterly arbitrary and constantly shifting lines in the sand as to what constitutes 'GNOME'. Its ridiculous. Its spiteful, and above all its counter productive. Arbitrary and constantly shifting lines in the sand ? You probably didn't understand the original problem. I don't think the position changed one bit in the number of years we've held the trademark. The Ubuntu GNOME logo is the GNOME logo with a circle around it! Not the GNOME logo with the Ubuntu circle, not the GNOME logo with an 18th century golden frame around, not the GNOME logo with its toes chopped off, just the GNOME logo in a way that only the GNOME project can and should use. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On 18 Nov 2013, at 01:15, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote: Hi, * Ubuntu GNOME trademark usage * The team is using the GNOME logo for their Ubuntu spin * We recommended they should not use the GNOME logo in the current form * '''ACTION''': Karen to contact the Ubuntu GNOME spin team for their use of the GNOME trademark Can we get more details on this? I'm obviously lacking context, but it sounds disappointing that downstreams cannot use the GNOME logo to promote GNOME spins/flavors they're doing. (Saying that as an openSUSE guy, who's not involved in Ubuntu GNOME in any way :-)) The problem, I guess from discussions when I was still on the board, is that the Ubuntu GNOME is just the GNOME logo in a circle. That's hardly enough differentiation. Using the GNOME logo on the cover art to show that it's built with GNOME would probably alright too. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for someone to help update GNOME Foundation wikipedia
On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 13:55 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Tiffany Antopolski tiffany.antopol...@gmail.com wrote: I could possibly give it a shot over the next couple of day. Tiffany Antopolski That would be great! There is actually a number of GNOME related pages in wikipedia that would require we update as it is all stale. Perhaps, we could identify them and perhaps pick a day and then get them all updated all at once? FWIW, I've had updating Totem's Wiki page on my list for a while. The table at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_player_software#cite_ref-5 is wildly inaccurate. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Announcing GNOME's official GitHub mirror
On 15 Aug 2013, at 22:20, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. Is it advisable to use nonfree GitHub as a secondary mirror for GNOME's free software? When you say that GitHub is nonfree, what do you mean by that? We do not have any definition for calling a service free or nonfree. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html. It's as much nonfree as Skype which you mention in your signature: Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. In Skype's case, both the service and the software are nonfree. Either change your sig or accept that you do have a definition after all ;) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A bitcoin wallet for Gnome?
Em Mon, 2013-07-22 às 19:08 -0400, Richard Stallman escreveu: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. Could you take care to write GNOME in capital letters when you refer to the GNOME project? I will ask Karen how strong a concern this is. The word GNOME is one of our trademarks: http://www.gnome.org/foundation/legal-and-trademarks/ So it would be great if you followed it. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Proposal: DNS change irc.gnome.org becomes A record and irc.gimpnet.org starts getting phased out.
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 18:08 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 10:57 -0500, meg ford wrote: Hi Bastien, On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 16:47 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: On 10 May 2013 15:55, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: I've never heard the word gimp used as a slur against handicapped people If it helps, I've never heard the word used this way either. However, my understanding of the common use of the word isn't any better (warning; possibly NSFW): https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gimp+masktbm=isch I think a majority of people on this list will be familiar with Pulp Fiction ;) And I wasn't arguing that GIMP is a nice name, it's just that I don't understand the reasoning enunciated in the original e-mail. Saying I don't want GNOME to be associated with SM leather bound dudes is better than (possibly) creating connections that don't exist between 2 words. That isn't the common meaning of the word, though. SM players use it specifically because it's offensive. Which is fine in their context (let's not debate it, at least, TMI), where it is understood that it is not real life and is never directed at someone who is not consenting. The general meaning of the term irl is a slur. I'll note that this still doesn't answer my question. If somebody has access to a dictionary with good etymology, I'd like them to clue me in... Thanks to Karen and Meg who pointed me (off-list) to: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gimp That answers my question. My searches on Merriam-Webster, the Wiktionary and the Cambridge dictionary didn't bring up this definition. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Proposal: DNS change irc.gnome.org becomes A record and irc.gimpnet.org starts getting phased out.
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 10:02 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: To many, 'gimp' is an offensive term an given our dedication to a11y it seems counter-intuitive to have this name in our infrastructure. I've never heard the word gimp used as a slur against handicapped people (which I guess is what you're getting at[1]). What made you think that there was a connection between those 2 uses of the word? Cheers [1]: Rather than people who might need a11y technologies, which is pretty much everyone (keyboard on touchscreen, text sizes, inverse colours, etc.) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Proposal: DNS change irc.gnome.org becomes A record and irc.gimpnet.org starts getting phased out.
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 16:47 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: On 10 May 2013 15:55, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: I've never heard the word gimp used as a slur against handicapped people If it helps, I've never heard the word used this way either. However, my understanding of the common use of the word isn't any better (warning; possibly NSFW): https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gimp+masktbm=isch I think a majority of people on this list will be familiar with Pulp Fiction ;) And I wasn't arguing that GIMP is a nice name, it's just that I don't understand the reasoning enunciated in the original e-mail. Saying I don't want GNOME to be associated with SM leather bound dudes is better than (possibly) creating connections that don't exist between 2 words. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Proposal: DNS change irc.gnome.org becomes A record and irc.gimpnet.org starts getting phased out.
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 10:57 -0500, meg ford wrote: Hi Bastien, On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 16:47 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: On 10 May 2013 15:55, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: I've never heard the word gimp used as a slur against handicapped people If it helps, I've never heard the word used this way either. However, my understanding of the common use of the word isn't any better (warning; possibly NSFW): https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gimp+masktbm=isch I think a majority of people on this list will be familiar with Pulp Fiction ;) And I wasn't arguing that GIMP is a nice name, it's just that I don't understand the reasoning enunciated in the original e-mail. Saying I don't want GNOME to be associated with SM leather bound dudes is better than (possibly) creating connections that don't exist between 2 words. That isn't the common meaning of the word, though. SM players use it specifically because it's offensive. Which is fine in their context (let's not debate it, at least, TMI), where it is understood that it is not real life and is never directed at someone who is not consenting. The general meaning of the term irl is a slur. I'll note that this still doesn't answer my question. If somebody has access to a dictionary with good etymology, I'd like them to clue me in... ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: jabber.gnome.org: a proposal
Hey, On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 10:03 -0400, Shaun McCance wrote: Hi all, I think it's clear from the recent thread that most people had no idea we had a Jabber server, or that they could get accounts on it, or how to go about doing so. What's more, over the last week, I tried to help two people use their jabber.gnome.org accounts with no success. I think it's unfair to judge the popularity of this service when it has been so buried and so extremely difficult to use. It also seems we can't create group chats on jabber.gnome.org, which limits our ability to use it as an official channel for GNOME teams. I propose that we address these issues to give Jabber a fair shake. We can then reevaluate its popularity in six months. As I already mentioned privately, I don't think the admins want to have to maintain the OpenFire Jabber server. First, as Olav mentioned, there's no SSL support for a service where you would expect privacy. Furthermore, I would expect the security concerns of running such a big service on GNOME servers to be a burden on the admins. Why not get the GNOME jabber service (co-)hosted somewhere else, where it would be possible to add the features you want? Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: jabber.gnome.org's future
Hey Andrea, On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 13:45 +0100, Andrea Veri wrote: Howdy guys, as you may know we're currently hosting an openfire istance (jabber server) on one of our machines, I'm currently migrating a good bunch of services and reviewing all the services we host in case they need an upgrade or just a little maintenance. I have a few questions I would like to ask to our Foundation members (jabber.gnome.org is actually a service meant for @gnome.org addresses) about our jabber service: 1. have you ever used jabber.gnome.org? I didn't even know it existed... Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Are membership renewals generally discussed publicly on the list? (was Re: Setting moderation bit for members who consistently hijack topics)
On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 12:36 -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote: Is it standard procedure for credentials of Foundation members to be discussed on-list like this -- particularly for existing members in good standing? My question was a rhetorical one. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Setting moderation bit for members who consistently hijack topics
Hey, On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 18:37 -0500, Karen Sandler wrote: On Wed, January 9, 2013 5:28 pm, Tobias Mueller wrote: Heya, On 09.01.2013 23:15, Andrew Cowie wrote: Would it be possible to set the moderation bit for Richard Stallman's posts to GNOME lists? sure it would be. The list is managed by mailman and it has that feature. As Stormy pointed out, every time there's a conversation about anything he jumps in and swerves off thread. I see neither the every time nor the swerving off part. Even if I did, I hope that it takes some more effort like providing references before being able to block someone from posting to GNOME mailing lists. Proof: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2013-January/msg0.html I agree. I don't. I should also note that Richard brings up a really solid point in his post, Maybe, but it was completely irrelevant to the conversation. It's not the Free Software Foundation's list, but the GNOME Foundation's list, and it wasn't on-topic. and while he should have started a different thread and perhaps worded it a little differently, He gets away with things that we would be ostracised for. Before the holidays I kept receiving e-mails from him asking me to call it GNU/Linux, and then to embrace the FSF when I explained that his repeated mails harmed his message and that I would be more likely to *not* say GNU/Linux because of his actions. Whilst calling me rude. And arguing that he wasn't. his post could be relevant to GNOME Foundation members to read. I think his thoughts have been plenty publicised through other channels. Moreover, it's probably more polite to make requests about changes to moderation policy off-list to the admins, Given that it's not possible to e-mail everyone but him, I certainly think it's the correct way to proceed. So he can answer in passive aggressive style. Finally, I'd really like to know what contributions he made to GNOME that would make him eligible to become a Foundation member. I cannot find any. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME now
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 17:22 -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote: On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 17:06 -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote: Is the GNU system for programmers only ? I doubt that is what you mean. I'm sure it isn't. I know :-), I'm just pointing out that's what it looked like. The software for the mobile devices has to be written by programmers. If the programmers write the software on desktop computers then we want them to be using GNOME while they do it. If programmers have to use some other desktop environment when writing the application, they'll want to have that same environment on their mobile devices, and that will have an impact on GNOME's usage. I'm really not worried about programmers desktops - GNU/Linux is so widespread in the technical fields that this is a battle we are already doing well in (not as well as I'd like, I'm still massively irritated by how many of my programmer colleagues think it's acceptable to use a freedom-hurting Apple laptop/desktop, but I digress). As we're in the nitpick thread, you're putting people running any software on Apple hardware in the same basket. My Mac runs Linux, always has. It's a shame I can't get custom designed hardware designed as easily as I can software. The goal we should be aiming for is freedom for all computer users, and like it or not, the majority of computer uses in the next 5 years will be on phones and tablets. To pretend otherwise and focus on PC-style devices is trying to gain traction in a shrinking market, which outside of business use will soon be irrelevant. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME now
On 28 Nov 2012, at 16:11, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: If you look at say a modern digital TV - which is a product that notoriously has to deal with everyone from the totally tech clueless to the video nuts who want to hand adjust everything then it is all in the settings. Most of it you don't notice because there are usually options in the settiings that basically look like Audio Balance:Standard Clear Voice User Defined and only if someone goes and selects user defined does the page of configuration material actually show itself. That's good design because it is discoverable, it is easy to back away from and also because it means the user defined settings can be fiddled with and are not lost when you flip back to a safe default. Rather they are kept and flipping back to user defined goes back to them as left. Much of this stuff in Gnome IMHO belongs in settings in that same kind of way. My TV is insanely configurable, but while I personally don't fiddle with the configuration much it doesn't get in the way. At worst the user experience is a one off I wonder what 'user defined' is click ooh not what I wanted click and only while exploring the settings by choice Your TV allows that: http://prolost.com/blog/2011/3/28/your-new-tv-ruins-movies.html I don't think we want to compare GNOME to TVs with awful UIs.___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME now
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 20:37 +, Alan Cox wrote: I would not count Gnome3 as usable on such device anyway - it is too resource hungry even on a typical x86 tablet. Do you have any evidence of that? My tablet doesn't have a fast graphics card (integrated Intel on Atom CPU), but certainly not one as bad as in your tablet (GMA600), and it's plenty usable. If you try to use it as you would a high-powered laptop, you could be disappointed, but I don't see this resource hunger you speak of. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Questions about the new GNOME Forums
Heya, Are those new forums: http://forums.worldofgnome.org/ the official GNOME forums? If so, why does they not follow the GNOME web style used on gnome.org, and more importantly, why are they hosted on a fansite (worldofgnome.org) instead of gnome.org? Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
Em Sun, 2012-11-18 às 23:39 -0600, meg ford escreveu: Hi, I hope it's slightly better handled than Emily last 2 posts, which managed to say that the removal of fallback was badly communicated (!) without details of what was done wrong, I think it would have made a hell of a lot more sense to announce that there were significant improvements made to llvm pipe, and then explain that we were planning to drop fallback mode. That way we would have given credit to ourselves as a community for thinking about how users would be effected by the change, and then we could have gone on to explain why the change was necessary. As is available on the page referenced in every communication about the removal of fallback? https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointSeven/Features/DropOrFixFallbackMode If people skip reading it intentionally, they'll only see the headline and make their (uninformed) comments. This is pretty much what happened. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 23:54 -0500, Chris Leonard wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 08:40 -0500, Chris Leonard wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: If you've got a fast CPU and reasonable but unusupported graphics hardware then it's usable but not great. No idea what Gnome 3 is like on a Raspberry Pi which would be the most useful other guide as its got fairly snappy graphics but naff CPU and relatively limited memory (512MB now) I suggest keeping an eye on the OLPC hardware as a low-end hardware benchmark for the GNOME desktop. As for market share there are over 2 million XO-1 and XO-1.5 out there and AFAICT the ARM based XO-1.75 is shipping and the touchscreen enabled XO-4 (in may ways similar to the XO-1.75) is on the way soon (FWIW ,I like the prototype I test on). OLPC builds are dual boot in Sugar and GNOME and I would love for GNOME to consider these users in their decision making. Have you shipped GNOME 3 on any of those, and, if so, were you using GNOME fallback or GNOME shell? You can see the packages used for x86 and ARM builds respectively, for the most recent development build from OLPC http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os11/xo-1/31011o0.packages.txt http://build.laptop.org/13.1.0/os11/xo-4/31011o4.packages.txt These are basically Fedora 17 (or 18) spins. I can't really answer the fallback or shell question as I do not fully understand the details. Do they have OpenGL acceleration available? You say that we should consider them in our decision making, but the majority (all?) of us don't have access to them, so we rely on people like you telling us about those things. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
Em Wed, 2012-11-14 às 11:08 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna escreveu: The wrong idea of course is that people think we're just removing features for no apparent reason even though for instance fallback mode was never guarantee. We need to correct those misconceptions. Having a good relationship with the general public is more important now than it was in the past thanks to social media. For example, with Ubuntu (who holds the largest share of users right now), GNOME is no longer the default and so it takes a conscious effort to change to GNOME. If they do the research, I don't want them to see a pile of ridiculous blog postings that aren't challenged by calm and simple rhetoric. A lot of work. I simply hope that communication is inwards as well as outwards. Regarding, Emily's post. You need to look at the overall message there. Not everyone is on the same page, and the fact that we are having this discussion with other people who clearly have the same concerns is indicative that we do have a problem. If you think there is no problem, we an drop this whole thing. Community enthusiasts won't go out there using the 'royal we' without some training. This stuff isn't easy, and it is important that our volunteers understand how to engage in both the GNOME community and the community at large. They will need training on GNOME's vision and purpose. That means, release team, designers, and relevant parties will need to help these volunteers in understanding it before going out there and speaking in our name. I'm having Karen be in charge of us. The end goal is to reduce the signal to noise ratio and get real feedback without hyperbole and let developers and designers be able to produce awesome stuff without feeling buried in undue negativity. The only thing I ask in return is that you consider the feedback that is being provided to you. If the feedback is negative, help us engage with the community with the right approach. If the feedback is positive, then I hope you will take that as encourage and motivation to keep doing it. Do you want that job? :) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 16:56 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: The wrong idea of course is that people think we're just removing features for no apparent reason even though for instance fallback mode was never guarantee. We need to correct those misconceptions. Are you saying that a fallback mode was never guaranteed ? As I recall, providing a fallback was indeed a blocker for GNOME 3 initial release... it was also around then that somehow gnome-shell was included in gnome releases without the regular module proposal period. Actually a non-negligible number of desktops as I understand running gnome based desktops just don't have the graphics hardware needed to run the shell (from my personal experience, in south america many, if not even most of the public desktops found in hostels etc, used by travelers... were actually running gnome). What has changed since the initial GNOME 3 release and now ? A number of things already mentioned in the d-d-l thread and on the wiki page, but mainly loads of bug fixes to the LLVMpipe renderer, and a better idea which use cases we want to support. Is gnome-shell now optimized and usable on said, older hardware ? There's a number of bugs blocking the 3.8 release about disabling animations in a number of cases (exported displays through VNC or SPICE, low-end machines). They're all linked from the wiki page and the bugzilla. Perhaps what we need is not a person/group of people working for 'good press' and telling people that we have their best interests at heart, but rather a bit more transparency in how we make our decisions... reinstating our module proposals might be a good first step towards including the whole community and getting them more involved in decision making again. There was a discussion 6 months ago where we decided to keep fallback mode, and another one happened about a month ago where we ended up deciding not to. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 08:40 -0500, Chris Leonard wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: If you've got a fast CPU and reasonable but unusupported graphics hardware then it's usable but not great. No idea what Gnome 3 is like on a Raspberry Pi which would be the most useful other guide as its got fairly snappy graphics but naff CPU and relatively limited memory (512MB now) I suggest keeping an eye on the OLPC hardware as a low-end hardware benchmark for the GNOME desktop. As for market share there are over 2 million XO-1 and XO-1.5 out there and AFAICT the ARM based XO-1.75 is shipping and the touchscreen enabled XO-4 (in may ways similar to the XO-1.75) is on the way soon (FWIW ,I like the prototype I test on). OLPC builds are dual boot in Sugar and GNOME and I would love for GNOME to consider these users in their decision making. Have you shipped GNOME 3 on any of those, and, if so, were you using GNOME fallback or GNOME shell? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
Hey Sri, On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 16:07 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: I'm looking for some charismatic, happy GNOME folks who can help engage with our community. We've had a bad run of late with a lot of folks getting the wrong idea of what we're trying to do. Which is? I'm looking for some talented folks who can help us engage with the press, on blogs, on mailing lists and explain our vision. I hope it's slightly better handled than Emily last 2 posts, which managed to say that the removal of fallback was badly communicated (!) without details of what was done wrong, and used a blog post by a troll to make false assertions about GTK+ 3.x's API stability. You might want to vouch for your community managers before you let them loose... ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 11:50 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: On 11/14/2012 11:38 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 16:07 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: I'm looking for some talented folks who can help us engage with the press, on blogs, on mailing lists and explain our vision. I hope it's slightly better handled than Emily last 2 posts, which managed to say that the removal of fallback was badly communicated (!) without details of what was done wrong, and used a blog post by a troll to make false assertions about GTK+ 3.x's API stability. You might want to vouch for your community managers before you let them loose... Really? Your solution to we have a PR problem is criticise the only people trying to address that problem by publicly saying they suck at it? Telling X you'll teach them how to communicate with Y and then creating a problem with X because of the way you communicated with Y. Tell me how exactly I should have brought this up privately. We have very few private mailing-lists in GNOME, and it wasn't discussed on any of those I would be on [1]. Sheesh. Yeah, me too. [1]: Not a cabal, it's Board-related lists. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!
On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 13:59 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, On 11/14/2012 01:52 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: Telling X you'll teach them how to communicate with Y and then creating a problem with X because of the way you communicated with Y. I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. What are X and Y? Developers and the community respectively. Tell me how exactly I should have brought this up privately. We have very few private mailing-lists in GNOME, and it wasn't discussed on any of those I would be on [1]. Maybe private email? Maybe bringing it up in a different way? Sri's initial email didn't mention Emily at all - were you just waiting for an opportunity to bring up your discontent? There's so many things wrong with the above paragraph. - Assume people mean well. Well, seems that I'm not granted the benefit of the doubt. - Sri's initial email made me think that it was an initiative by the marketing team, which Emily is a part of. It seems reasonable to think that she would be involved in this at one point or another. - And discontent. Well, I think that I have reasonable doubts to think that those community managers wouldn't be able to carry the message of developers truthfully if said developers aren't being talked to. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A few observations about GIMPNET
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 11:33 -0500, Bryen M Yunashko wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 18:24 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: Yeah, the suffix #gnome-$(channel_name) should help with that and many other large projects are living on Freenode since several years and they are able to administer the relevant channels with the proper ACLs without delays and problems, so finding a channel could be a problem for the very first months. cheers, Andrea Might be more interesting to do a survey. This is the day surveys replace nazis as a way to end Internet conversations. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A few observations about GIMPNET
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 17:55 +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote: join #gstreamer, or #freedesktop or #pulseaudio or #nm and check for yourself, indeed ALL was an exageration, but it's not hard to figure out that a huge majority of us have a freenode network tab on our IRC client That's where all the non-GNOME community is, probably because they didn't want to be strongly associated with GNOME, but still needed the IRC infrastructure. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A few observations about GIMPNET
On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 15:45 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: I see many people have expressed their consensus in this, thus I'll defer the decision to the Board. Thanks to anyone sending a mail about this concern. 3 people agreeing with you isn't consensus. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A few observations about GIMPNET
On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 11:11 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 11:07 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 11:33 -0500, Bryen M Yunashko wrote: Might be more interesting to do a survey. This is the day surveys replace nazis as a way to end Internet conversations. I don't see that coming if the survey was limited to GNOME foundation members instead of random people on the interwebs who know better(TM). We'd be moving to Freenode to reach out to the wider Free Software community, but only requesting feedback from Foundation members? I don't understand the reasoning here. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Memberships needing renewal (2012-10)
Hey, On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 10:52 +, GNOME Membership and Elections Committee wrote: Hi, as per point 1.3 of [1], here it comes a list of members in need of a renew in case they didn't receive their individual e-mail: First name, Last name (Last renewed on) * Adam, Weinberger (2010-10-01) * Damon, Chaplin (2010-10-01) * Matthias, Clasen (2010-10-01) * José, Aliste (2010-10-12) * Martin, Sevior (2010-10-12) * Seif, Lotfy (2010-10-12) * Steve, Frécinaux (2010-10-12) * Simos, Xenitellis (2010-10-12) * Xan Lopez, Saborido (2010-10-12) * Matthias, Warkus (2010-10-12) * Ariel, Rios (2010-10-12) * Reinout van, Schouwen (2010-10-12) * Allan, Gottlieb (2010-10-12) * Joe, Shaw (2010-10-12) * Christopher, Blizzard (2010-10-12) * Gregory, Leblanc (2010-10-12) * Francisco Diéguez, Souto (2010-10-22) * Daniël, van Eeden (2010-10-22) * J.H.M., Dassen (2010-10-22) * Adam, Schreiber (2010-10-22) * Simon, Budig (2010-10-22) * Pedro Marcelo, Villavicencio Garrido (2010-10-22) * Jeremy, Perry (2010-10-22) Can you please sort those by surname, or even by name, rather than last renewed on date? Makes it hard to read... Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Changes to the GNOME Foundation Bylaws from 2002
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 10:45 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, On 10/01/2012 03:07 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote: Dear Foundation, I propose to change the current bylaws to the document attached. If you object these changes, please raise your voice until 2012-10-31. If 5% of the membership (20 members) object, we will have a vote. Otherwise, the changes will be accepted. Doesn't modifying the by-laws usually work the other way around (as in, we need a vote to change them)? See below. Then again, if this is housekeeping and we're just applying diffs voted in previous referenda, there doesn't even need to be a discussion, does there? We're not changing the by-laws, we're rewording them to get rid of errors or potential sources of confusions, and update them based on previous referenda so as to get rid of the addendums and amendments. To amend the by-laws in that way, you don't need a vote (as one of the sections that's changing in the by-laws shows), just less than 5% disagreement. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Discussing changes to the GNOME Foundation Bylaws
Em Mon, 2012-09-10 às 16:20 +0100, Bastien Nocera escreveu: Em Fri, 2012-08-31 às 20:51 +0200, Tobias Mueller escreveu: Dear Foundation, we worked on the bylaws and this is the current status. Please find the current bylaws here: http://www.gnome.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/bylaws.pdf. I converted that PDF to reStructuredText and you can find the current bylaws in that format here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2002.rst. (This list only allows attachments 40kB :-\ ) The membership voted to change the bylaws several times since 2002, but the actual bylaws were never updated. Also, some things work now differently than a decade ago. We came up with a changed version which you can find here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2012.rst. The diff of the changes is here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2002-2012.diff. This is hard to read. Can you put it in bugzilla? That way, people can comment on the patches directly there, and see the differences side by side. Tobias? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Discussing changes to the GNOME Foundation Bylaws
Em Fri, 2012-08-31 às 20:51 +0200, Tobias Mueller escreveu: Dear Foundation, we worked on the bylaws and this is the current status. Please find the current bylaws here: http://www.gnome.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/bylaws.pdf. I converted that PDF to reStructuredText and you can find the current bylaws in that format here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2002.rst. (This list only allows attachments 40kB :-\ ) The membership voted to change the bylaws several times since 2002, but the actual bylaws were never updated. Also, some things work now differently than a decade ago. We came up with a changed version which you can find here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2012.rst. The diff of the changes is here http://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws-2002-2012.diff. This is hard to read. Can you put it in bugzilla? That way, people can comment on the patches directly there, and see the differences side by side. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: AGM Meeting: Proposal (on p.g.o)
Em Mon, 2012-07-30 às 11:55 +0200, Alexandre Franke escreveu: On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Johannes Schmid j...@jsschmid.de wrote: I don't use RSS. I am browsing this pages from work where I am not allowed to install software and I don't wanna use Google Reader (because I don't have any google account apart from GSoC). I like to be able to access plain webpages and that's basically where you catch people. If they are interested they *might* use RSS at some point but they won't discover stuff with RSS. Ok, so what about having n.g.o merged onto planet, but: * we keep the feeds separate so that people can choose to subscribe to either project news or hacker news or both * as Vincent said, we make them visually separated Or maybe we could stop bikeshedding and let the marketing team do what they feel is necessary for news.gnome.org and planet.gnome.org to reach their respective audiences. Which is what I recommended at the beginning of this thread :) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: AGM Meeting: Proposal (on p.g.o)
Hello, Em Sat, 2012-07-28 às 12:05 +0200, Johannes Schmid escreveu: Hi all! You all know that the Foundation (Board) set policies on planet.gnome.org (only foundation members, only real persons, etc.) which is in general fine while the editors still have the final word in inclusion. However, could we vote on the following during AGM meeting (which does not impact the editors final word...): The Foundation adds two (and only these two) exceptions to the p.g.o policies: * commit-digest * gnome-memes As the people on the list that might not have been present at the AGM didn't get an update. We did not vote on this particular item, but chose to discuss it on the mailing-list instead. I was of the opinion that Alberto (the p.g.o editor) should be working with the marketing team to make sure that blogs relevant to following the development of GNOME get added to p.g.o. That would mean yes to commit-digest and no to gnome-memes. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: AGM Meeting: Proposal (on p.g.o)
On 29 Jul 2012, at 12:00, Johannes Schmid j...@jsschmid.de wrote: Hi Bastien! I was of the opinion that Alberto (the p.g.o editor) should be working with the marketing team to make sure that blogs relevant to following the development of GNOME get added to p.g.o. That would mean yes to commit-digest and no to gnome-memes. Is the last sentence the official opinion of the marketing team and has it been discussed (somewhere)? I am missing arguments here...I feel the gnome-memes is highly relevant because if we lost the talent for a laugh on our work we are basically screwed. I'm of the opinion pretty much covers my answer :) The point of deferring is that I would defer. If the marketing team thinks that GNOME memes is interesting, then so be it. I don't see it being kept up long term. Cheers Regards, Johannes ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: AGM Meeting: Proposal (on p.g.o)
Em Sun, 2012-07-29 às 15:41 +0100, Alberto Ruiz escreveu: Maybe we can just forward peoeple to GNOME Memes through the official GNOME twitter account and/or G+... I think this needs a bit more discussion and thought. However, it seems to me that there is a broad consensus that one way or the other Commit Digests should go in, am I right? From my side, I'd say ask the marketing team. I guess they'd come to similar conclusions. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME Summit in Boston
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 17:32 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: Hi, TL;DR: Summit in Cambridge MA this year, Montreal the next? snip Thoughts? None more than your original mail. I know we have a good volunteer base in Montréal to help organise a Summit, but it would be nice to be able to alternate. Cambridge would be nice as long as we can get enough of a volunteer base on the ground. We wouldn't want to burn you out ;) Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME Foundation Board Elections Spring 2012 - Preliminary Results
Hey Andrea, On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 14:30 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: Dear Foundation Members, the GNOME Foundation Membership Elections Committee is pleased to announce the preliminary results for the Board of Directors. We strongly encourage everyone to look at the detailed results to verify their ballot. (see below) These results can be challenged by sending an e-mail to electi...@gnome.org. The challenges have to be sent before Tuesday, 2012-06-19, 23:59 UTC. Please note these results should not be considered final until any challenge have been resolved. The results can be found at: http://vote.gnome.org/vote/results.php?election_id=17 A list of all votes can be found at: http://vote.gnome.org/vote/votes.php?election_id=17 If the results are not challenged, the new Board will be composed by: Bastien Nocera Emmanuele Bassi Andreas Nilsson Joanmarie Diggs Tobias Mueller Shaun McCance Seif Lotfy Some figures about the votes: there were 375 registered voters. 186 voters sent valid ballots. First, congratulations to all the new Board members, and many thanks to all the candidates that didn't make the cut. Reading the results[1], I saw in round 3: Candidate Bastien Nocera was chosen by breaking the tie randomly. How was this done randomly? What would the results have been if Emmanuele was selected as the tie-breaker instead? Cheers [1]: http://vote.gnome.org/results.php?election_id=17 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Questions for the board election candidates
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 09:58 +0200, Robert Nordan wrote: Hi all, I have a few questions for the candidates in the upcoming election to the board. They are obviously shaped by my interests, but I believe that other Foundation members may be interested in the answers as well. 1) Open Source or Free Software? This is about personal philosophy: Do you prefer the pragmatism of the Open Source Initiative or the political idealism of the Free Software Foundation? (Some of the candidates have already flagged a stance on this.) Reading http://www.opensource.org/history: The conferees decided it was time to dump the moralizing and confrontational attitude that had been associated with free software [...] This sort of characterisation of another organisation is really not what I would want GNOME associated with. To me, they are different terms for the same thing. If we were talking specifically of attitudes of proponents of the different terms, I have bad stories to tell about both sides. The important thing is making 2) Overhaul of GNOME's git infrastructure I personally believe that the way the GNOME git system is set up is a bit antiquated and doesn't use git to its full potential. It's fine for developers with commit access, but contributors without have to create individual patches and attach them to bug trackers or convince the maintainers to look up their personal branch hosted somewhere else and merge in. In a time when GitHub is setting the standard for ease of use when it comes to forking, merging and development, GNOME is lagging behind. I have heard chatter It isn't chatter, it was discussed on this very list: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2011-September/msg8.html among GNOME people about setting up a GNOME instance of Gitorious to gain that kind of functionality, but nothing has really happened. Do any of the candidates want to make a juicy campaign promise on this issue? It's not up to the Board to make the decision of whether to deploy a gitorious instance. If money, consulting, or similar is needed to deploy it, then we can help, but the infrastructure work, including explaining the needs for such a deployment, would need to come from the various GNOME teams, and a group of hackers actually doing the work. 3) GNOME and Ubuntu In the recent years there has been a public perception of a schism between GNOME and Ubuntu resulting in double work and wasted resources on both sides. Do you think that perception is unfounded or not, and how do you plan to handle it? schism: A split or separation within a group or organization We're still GNOME, and in one piece, so not really a schism, and more of a fork. I think Canonical (and not Ubuntu) have tried to make their own desktop, developing their own shell so they could differentiate their offering, but keeping most of the upstream underlying infrastructure. Problems start happening when the underlying infrastructure moves and your project relies on the old bits. You end up spending time reconciling your changes based on the old infrastructure, and don't have time or resources to upstream the things you could upstream (and thus lower your maintenance burden). When resources aren't so tight, we usually see good contributions flowing from Ubuntu into GNOME. The rest of the problem is Free Software 101: the lower your delta to upstream, the easier it is to maintain. I'm sure we'll see Ubuntu's fork get back closer to upstream. 4) Stance on GNOME forks Similarly, GNOME 3 has met with some opposing developments like Cinnamon and MATE. It is of course the right of dissatisfied users to do what they want and fork if they like, but should GNOME ignore them or try to find ways to work together with them? They're allowed to, certainly. For MATE, I think they'll hit maintenance problems very soon, when they've stopped spending time running sed on GNOME sources. Cinnamon is a good example of shell extensions use (cf. question 2, Unity could probably be implemented like that), but I think they're missing out on a lot of innovations and changes happening in GNOME 3. The effect is going to be more and more jarring as GNOME applications change to integrate with the shell. So I'm disappointed that they wouldn't choose to work upstream in some cases, but Cinnamon is certainly a more viable fork, especially if they start contributing to infrastructure, rather than just skinning the shell. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 08:21 +0100, Allan Day wrote: Hi all, Thanks to all the candidates for stepping forward. It's fantastic that you are interested in doing this important work. A question for you: Sometimes it can feel like the Board of Directors is a bit divorced from the rest of the GNOME project. I don't quite understand the question. The Board is not where technical decisions are made, it's not where applications or new dependencies are made. What were your expectations of the Board doing, and that they don't deliver on? Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: European bank account for donations
Em Mon, 2012-03-12 às 12:16 +0100, Dave Neary escreveu: Hi, On 03/11/2012 04:30 PM, Baptiste Mille-Mathias wrote: 2012/3/10 Germán Póo-Caamañog...@gnome.org: Does this make sense? It might need necessary to figure out the way to do it properly (I think that is what Baptiste is trying to figure out). Otherwise, for the tax office this sort of operation can look as money laundry or tax evasion. …and I don't want to go to jail. :) That might be a bit dramatic... Yes, we can receive money from people in Europe, and we can transfer that money to the US organisation with an invoice. And yes, we do need to be careful about falling foul of money laundering laws. We already had several issue due to the location of the Foundation in the past, like the tee-shirt design contest back on November 2010 [1] which excluded inhabitants of some countries due to the embargo decided by the U.S.A. It's perhaps the right time to think to have a legal representation in Europe (and perhaps on other continents). It is true that it has not always been easy to deal with the GNOME Foundation, because the foundation understandably worries about its 501(c)3 status and making funds available without a sufficient paper trail on how it will be spent (certainly the Libre Graphics Meeting guys will testify to that) - but the same should go for any subsidiaries working with the foundation. It's certainly much easier if money donated in the EU is spent on EU activities that are easily justifiable. In that case, the problem becomes that we have two separate entities, with two separate organisational structures, with separate budgets. Which is why I wanted the existing US organisation to somehow have a Euro account. The accounting and budgeting is complicated enough as-is... I disagree that a US organisation conforming to US export regulations is a huge problem, though - IMHO this is a completely separate issue to the money issue we're talking about here. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: European bank account for donations
Em Sat, 2012-03-10 às 13:21 +0200, Luc Pionchon escreveu: snip What administrative hassle are you taking about concretely? http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/sections/a_votre_service/vos_demarches/association-utilite-publique/arup/downloadFile/attachedFile_5/pieces_demande_de_rup0206.pdf ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: European bank account for donations
Hello Alexander, Em Fri, 2012-03-09 às 11:15 +0100, Alexander van Loon escreveu: Hello, snip Not only does my Dutch bank require an IBAN-number for foreign bank transfers – which the fundraiser page does not provide – the cost for a transfer to the USA is prohibitive. My bank charges € 5 for transfers to countries not belonging to the EEA [2] and if I pay for the costs of the receiving bank in the USA another € 9 is added. By contrast, my bank (and I assume many other banks in the Netherlands and the EU) charges no fee for bank transfers within the EEA. So in short, could the GNOME Foundation provide a bank account at a bank in the EEA so that most Europeans can donate without any additional cost (I'm sure PayPal also takes a cut)? I'm sure somebody will be able to get into more details about this problem, but I'll sum it up. The GNOME Foundation is a US not-for-profit entity. We do not have any legal existence in the EU or the EEA, and thus cannot hold a bank account in the EU. This has caused problems in the past, for organising GUADEC for example, when trying to limit the amount of cost for transfers, and currency exchange commissions. Last year, I looked through the possible options for opening Euro accounts for the Foundation through international banks like Barclay's, HSBC, and others. I could find nothing that would be appropriate for the Foundation. If anybody knows of bank account in Euros that could be held by a US entity, do let us know. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Could a few influential GNOME develoers join gnu-prog-disc...@gnu.org?
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 13:03 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: The way the comment was presented (and granted, we're missing context here) was as if this behavior was a bug. I doubt anyone believed the behavior was unintentional. So it's definitely not a bug in the strict sense of the term. The question raised in that discussion was whether this behavior was better or worse than an alternative. I mentioned that issue as an example of a discussion, not in order to argue about it at length. But since we're talking about it, here's a suggestion people might perhaps like. When creating a directory named with a translation of the word Desktop, for use as a desktop, how about making that a symlink to Desktop under suitable circumstances? That way, if you change locales, you will still have the same desktop contents. And I was hoping to steer the discussion towards the fact that 1) it's a piece of freedesktop.org software that does this, so 2) the discussion should take place neither on GNU mailing-lists, nor on GNOME ones, but on freedesktop.org ones (in this case, the xdg list). Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Could a few influential GNOME develoers join gnu-prog-disc...@gnu.org?
On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 21:36 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: Can't these be brought up on proper GNOME lists then? Especially seeing as there is no public archive for your GNU list. We use this list for private discussions about GNU in general. Sometimes the issues relate to GNOME, but that doesn't mean they're specifically about GNOME. It would be useful for some GNOME developers with responsibility and influence to be included. In the middle of a broader discussion about internationalization, not specifically about GNOME, someone mentioned this: Another problem I stumbled upon is the new habit of software like Gnome and/or desktop handlers to use localized names for directories such as ~/Desktop. This is a pure nuisance, depending on my locale ~/Desktop becomes ~/Bureau or ~/Labortablo. A GNOME developer in the list would have seen this and could have responded, raises the issue in the appropriate GNOME list, or whatever is TRT. It isn't feasible for me, and I don't know who to ask. (I think that person was right: learning one English word `Desktop' is not much of a burden, and on the other hand, this feature can cause a real nuisance for users that use multiple locales.) In addition with everything that is wrong with this comment (which has already been mentioned by the other replies in this thread), I'll mention that this particular behaviour is specified: http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/xdg-user-dirs If there are problems with this approach, they should be raised on the XDG mailing-list, not on a private list. /Bastien, subscribed to more than enough mailing-lists ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Could a few influential GNOME develoers join gnu-prog-disc...@gnu.org?
On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 08:20 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: The list gnu-prog-disc...@gnu.org is meant for GNU maintainers to discuss issues. Some of them pertain to GNOME. It would be useful to have some influential GNOME developers in the list. Could you invite a few to contact Karl? Could you go into a bit more details as to how those discussions might pertain to GNOME? The archives of the mailing-list are closed to non-subscribers, and that makes it hard to gauge what sort of people you're asking for exactly. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - August 9, 2011
Hey Og, On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 10:27 -0400, Og Maciel wrote: On 10/18/2011 10:09 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: == Regrets == * Og Maciel I was no longer on the Board by this time, so this is maybe an oversight? You're on the board until the hand-over in-person meeting. These were the minutes for the 9th August meeting at the Desktop Summit. So, yes, we added you to the regrets. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: New Foundation Members News from the Membership Committee
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 12:20 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Allan Day wrote: Hi, I'm wondering - would it be possible to post these membership announcements on the Foundation blog? New members to the Foundation are really valuable and it would be great to do more publicity around it. I think this could be a very nice addition. Any opinion from the Board about this? I can easily send out a post on the Foundation's [1] blog when there will be additional new members to announce. Makes sense to me. We'll get this discussed on the board. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: On git.gnome.org and gitorious
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 12:25 +0200, Jens Georg wrote: With a gitorious instance set up, we'd achieve both a place for personal branches, stopping the delete work-in-progress branch from git.gnome.org, then create it again, pushing all commits because I rebased dance, and a place where it's easier to set up accounts for newcomers (which is a reason why the design work doesn't happen on git.gnome.org). If we were to change the infrastructure we use for hosting git trees, we'd need something more concrete than wouldn't it be nice. Please give us a list of advantages, changes, potential pitfalls, pricing, etc. For example, why gitorious and not github? I think you misunderstood sth, this is about setting up a private instance of the gitorious software on gnome servers, not moving infrastructure to gitorious.org. I understood very well. My point being that the request is very unclear to begin with. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Two Questions for the Board Candidates
On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 10:38 -0700, Lefty wrote: First: Since the issue of divisive attitude[s] such as Richard sometimes seems to [promote?] when he talks about 'GNU/Linux' came up, I'd be interested to know what, if anything, candidates for the Board propose to do to address the ongoing waste of time and energy in the community over trivia like Linux versus GNU/Linux, free versus open source, and the like. This extends to things like litmus tests on mailing lists derailing discussions into observations about which email clients or operating systems participants might be using at the time they post, for example. Attempts to divide the community and delegitimize individuals and their viewpoints are common, and becoming increasingly so in the past few years. Bad feelings have driven many away from the level of involvement in the community they've previously had. Do candidates see this as a problem? Do they have any proposals for addressing it? If you have particular examples to go with this, I'm sure the Foundation Board could look into this, but I haven't seen any ostracism in our community that wasn't in part brought by the person who ended up being shunned. Second: Do candidates have any view as to how the disastrous attempts at engagement by GNOME with the mobile space might be improved on? The GNOME Mobile and Embedded Initiative went nowhere, and arguably handed the mobile device space to Google and Android by forfeit. Since that time, there have been various attempts to get community-based, mainstream open source onto mobile devices, all of which have pretty much died. The sole remaining effort seems to be MeeGo, and GNOME has no apparent direct involvement there. Do candidates have any thoughts on the future of GNOME with respect to the mobile space? It's the fastest-growing portion of the general computing device market, and the main platform choices are proprietary or as good as. One of the issues raised by Canonical with respect to the GNOME 3 shell for Ubuntu was that it wasn't felt to be as appropriate for tablets and the like as Unity... GNOME mobile was never going to be _a_ product, as we didn't not build a phone UI, and probably won't for a while still. We should re-target the marketing effort as a way to show off our technologies. As for tablets, I seriously doubt Unity is any more ready to handle tablets than GNOME 3 is, whether at the bottom or at the top of the stacks. Effort is under way, and I'm sure we'll all be happy when a more complete solution is available. That ends up being a technical problem though, rather than one for the GNOME Foundation to handle. I expect the GNOME Foundation to support those efforts adequately. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to candidates: on-line services
On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 00:27 +0200, Gil Forcada wrote: Hi members, Everyday more and more services are offered on the cloud and there's also initiatives powered by Free Software (tomboy on-line...). One of the main problems for Free Software projects providing cloud services is the hardware/administration/connection expenses which are mostly a no-go for a Free Software project without any backing from a big corporation. As a member of a the future board will you look for ways to promote and look for resources to offer these free software cloud services? Maybe part of a funding campaign (be a Friend of GNOME and have a Tomboy on-line account for free). I'm not sure that administration, hardware, or the likes are the major blockers for this sort of problem. What's really missing is the cloud services themselves. When we do get a cloud service worth offering for the whole of our community, we'll find a way to get past the financial hurdles. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Candidates question: Contributor agreement
On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 12:01 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: Given that we already have a policy on copyright assignments[1], I wondered what is your position regarding contributor agreements[2]? Should the board do something with contributor agreements and if so, what should be done? I think contributor agreements are detrimental to our contribution model. A number of people have developed better prose as to why they don't fit us, so I'll let finding out more data on this as an exercise to the reader (the reader of planet GNOME should have no problems finding more data :) [1] https://live.gnome.org/CopyrightAssignment [2] e.g. http://lwn.net/Articles/442782/ and http://www.harmonyagreements.org/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: question for candidates
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 11:10 -0700, Andy Tai wrote: As Fedora is the only current GNU/Linux distribution adapting GNOME 3.0 as the default desktop, It's the first one to come out, but it certainly won't be the last. I expect other distributions to follow suite shortly. how would you facilitate to make GNOME technologies to work well (meaning minimal local patching needed) on other GNU/Linux distributions like Debian, It's a technical problem, not one for the Foundation Board to handle, but we'll make sure that the necessary support is there if needed. and such distributions which may work on components competing with certain parts of GNOME, such as Ubuntu? And how would you facilitate to make GNOME 3 run well on other free OS environments, especially the BSD based ones, like OpenBSD and FreeBSD? Again, a technical problem. If *BSD contributors came to the Foundation asking to organise a hackfest, we would take it as seriously as other hackfests. And how would you facilitate collaborations with Ubuntu, especially, despite the different viewpoints of developers on issues like GNOME Shell vs. Unity? We'll do our best to ensure that there is collaboration between the two. Some things are currently in the works on the Foundation side, which I guess you'll see being made public soon. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for candidates
On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 16:34 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: I'd like to ask the candidates this question: * What do you think GNOME should do to help promote the ideals of free software, beyond being composed of free programs. We should write Free Software that doesn't suck, and that people actually want to use. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: [question to candidates] GNOME OS
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote: Hello all, GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1], and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards to distributions (based or not on the Linux kernel). What are your thougths on this?[2] I'd rather not expand on the subject as part of answering questions as a candidate to the Board. Do you think this is a foundation job to answer those questions? If not, is this a responsibility of the release team? Or something that is best left unanswered, as pieces are put into positions by different persons? It's neither the Board's nor the Release Team's decision, in my opinion, to drive the project technically. The project, and the community that drives the project in particular, are the ones in charge of where they want the project to go. If you're asking me, and my fellow candidates, whether you think there might be push-back from partners, Advisory Board members, or distributions on this, I don't think so. The goal of the GNOME OS part of the timeline is to ensure that GNOME as a desktop doesn't block on other parts of the infrastructure, and provides a complete and integrated experience. That doesn't stop people from using bits of the GNOME stack for their applications, or special cases. That also doesn't stop people from using other distributions, Unices, or kernels from adapting GNOME for them (or their code for GNOME in some cases), it probably just wouldn't provide the same experience. Cheers [1] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeOS doesn't help, the only laid out plan I know was in Jon McCann Shell Yes! talk at GUADEC (now locked on slideshare.net) [2] this question comes first but in terms of candidacies to the board, I believe the next ones are even more important. ___ foundation-list mailing list 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
Re: Candidacy: Lionel Dricot
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 15:19 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote: Hi Bastien et al, I'm sorry for the late reply but I wanted to take the time to clarify my vision. snip But improving the situation is not only about adding a webpage. It's really about adding a new paradigm to the GNOME foundation. The GNOME foundation should act as the owner of a commercially supported product. This is of course huge and I don't think it would be achievable in one year. But, if elected, I would like to achieve at least the first steps in that direction. Could you explain what concrete plans you have? Are you thinking that the GNOME Foundation should take care of distributing bids from customers to its ecosystem? You seem to have a set plan, but we don't know any of the details for it, which makes it a bit hard to judge. Le lundi 23 mai 2011 à 12:02 +0100, Bastien Nocera a écrit : Definitely, in fact, that's exactly what I discussed with Martyn on foundation-list a couple of weeks ago. I hope I convinced you that it was not only about a webpage. No, but starting work on the webpage would certainly be a good start :) Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Fwd: Question for the canditates
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 19:49 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: Forwarding to foundation-list two questions we received from Ali-Reza Anghaie. Please don't add membership-committee@g.o as CC, follow-ups should be kept on -list. Thanks. Andrea -- Forwarded message -- From: Ali-Reza Anghaie a...@packetknife.com Date: 2011/5/25 Subject: Question for the canditates To: membership-commit...@gnome.org I'd like to ask two questions of all the candidates please: 1) As GNOME has matured the number of officially supported language bindings has decreased. The quality and availability of various language communities own bindings has varied wildly to say the least. How would you work to improve this situation? 2) What are your own feelings on supporting fairly new languages and standards like Go and Perl 6? Both of those are technical issues, so not within the remit of the GNOME Foundation Board. But the Foundation has helped organise various hackfests in the past, such as the Python hackfest[1], and the GNOME+Mono one[2]. So I'm sure that if other bindings needed a similar push to be better integrated in the GNOME platform, the Foundation would be happy to help, budgets permitting. [1]: https://live.gnome.org/Hackfests/Python2011 [2]: https://live.gnome.org/GNOME%2BMonoHackfest2010 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Candidacy: Lionel Dricot
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:29 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote: Le lundi 23 mai 2011 à 00:14 +0200, Vincent Untz a écrit : Le dimanche 22 mai 2011, à 23:45 +0200, Lionel Dricot a écrit : It would have been easy to criticize, to say loudly that the board should improve the situation without moving a single finger. But I think that, if you want something to happen, you have to make it yourself. I think that the GNOME companies should be represented on the board permanently. That's why I took the decision to stand for election. Two questions on this: Good questions, I knew it would happen after I re-read my previous answer ;-) - why do you need to be on the board to make it happen yourself? It would be possible to work on that without being on the board. I considered that option and I will definitely do if I'm not elected. Definitely, in fact, that's exactly what I discussed with Martyn on foundation-list a couple of weeks ago. But think that the communication about commercial support is only the tip of the iceberg, that there is often small issues or misunderstanding. What sort of problems do you expect to see? I'm pretty unclear on what small issues or misunderstanding you would see. It is not only about having a page that list the commercial support companies. It's more about a deep collaboration between the foundation and the companies that live from GNOME. I personally don't think that the Foundation needs to be involved in setting this up. Rubber-stamping this, certainly, but I don't think that those companies that offer services need the Board to be involved to make changes to the GNOME website. And for such deep collaboration to be optimal, the board is the best place. - isn't the Advisory Board, and not the Board, the group where the GNOME companies (and others, obviously) should be represented? I think that the board should represent the community. As I said in my previous mail, I believe that the community is mainly composed of independents, big companies with GNOME products and small companies with GNOME services. Thus, I believe that the board should be a fair mix of people from those different backgrounds. I especially happy to see the candidacy of Diego, Ryan and Andre regarding that. I would argue that the Board doesn't need to match the represention of the community, but needs to represent the community at large. Otherwise we would have a different voting system. Bringing your knowledge of a certain subject to the Board is certainly a good thing, but I don't think a person needs to work for a consultancy to be able to represent consultancies effectively, for example. Of course, people might disagree with this vision of the board. That's why we have elections ;-) I hope to have answered your questions. Lionel PS: part of my hidden agenda is to impose French as the official language. I already started the trend by never pronouncing the H (like in it appens or having a new CSS team for your desktop. What? Ah, a theme!) I'm going for cockney rhyming slang. PPS: where should I send the icecream to make you stop asking questions? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Candidacy: Ryan Lortie
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:59 +0100, Allan Day wrote: snip That said, some questions: * Do you have any concrete ideas of what 'strong and coordinated technical leadership' would involve? It sounds very nice and all, but I'd like to hear some specifics before I cast my vote. ;) * If you are elected, you will have to fulfill your role as a board member, yet you have not mentioned anything to do with your suitability for this post. Indeed, it almost makes me think that you are unsuitable for the position! So, do you think you will be able to do a good job in the day to day running of the Foundation? To be honest, that's something we (myself as a member of the Board, and Ryan) have been discussing over the past couple of weeks. I would think that it does need to be discussed, but I don't think that I agree with Ryan's assertion that a technical board is needed. I poked holes in his proposal, and I'm sure we'll discuss it more in private before putting the results forward for discussion within the community. * I presume that your candidacy is an attempt to gain a mandate for the changes you are proposing, yet I wonder whether it will count for much without the support of the release team and maintainers. Have you had any discussions with either of the above about your ideas? I would hope it doesn't give a mandate, as the proposals seem hazy at best right now. * Following on from the above: do you think that you personally need to be on the board for these changes to take place? Why not just get a discussion going and come up with a plan? I'd also be interested in knowing that :) Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - March 29th, 2011
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 17:42 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote: On 15/04/11 14:45, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 11:39 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote: We wanted to discuss with someone involved in that space what our options were.It's an informal chat about what could be done. Andreas took on the action item, and chose to talk with Ryan because he knows Ryan well. If I had taken on the action item, I'd probably have asked Robert McQueen or Murray Cumming because I know them well, and have had plenty of interaction with them. This does really just illustrate what I am trying to point out. Doesn't it make more sense to have a mailing list for all companies involved in GNOME to discuss things like this instead of asking specific people from specific companies? You would get much more feedback and a more general consensus. That's backwards. We're in early discussion about what we should do to engage the companies. So, yes, having a mailing-list for all those interested companies would certainly be helpful. Having a directory of companies on the developer.gnome.org website was also mentioned. This is the sort of ideas that we're looking to get some information about, eg. what means of communication would be best to engage the companies in the first place. snip He's not representing anyone, and he won't be a decision maker in the process. The representatives would be contacted once we have a more accomplished idea about this. What's to decide? How we want to engage the companies to start discussing the problems we mentioned. The representatives which Ryan informs you about? Idea about offering services? Surely asking many people yields better results than asking just one person? But, at the end of the day, you can also help yourself by providing us with your feedback, or better, stepping up to the plate and do the work to fill those needs and help us help you. Gladly, just let me know what you want feedback on. What work is needed? I was actually planning on doing something with Stormy during the past year, but never got around to it (that's my fault of course). Ranting and raving about how we want to have an informal chat with someone about a topic you might be interested is counter-productive. Where did I rant? I actually suggested a more open forum to help you get that informal chat from more sources to help you make a more informed decision. Returning to the topic at hand. Do any of the companies you mentioned provide developer support for GTK+? I've had the experience of providing developer support for Red Hat (that did include fixing Motif bugs...), Yes. We certainly do of course. I am confident Collabora and Igalia do or have, perhaps even Openismus. In the end, unless you ask *us* how can you know? I am guessing based on rumour and upstream contributions. You can't know for sure without approaching companies. and most of the questions were about: - migration from one platform to another Do you have more context here, or an example even? In my case, mostly migrating from Solaris to Linux APIs. In the case of GTK+ apps, I'd expect, migrating my app from Windows to Linux. - best practices when needing to change the implementation We can provide that (if you mean specific code bases like GTK+). Kris Rietveld (from Lanedo) even did a talk about it last year at GUADEC which might be available somewhere. He spoke about vendor specific branches and working with upstream repositories. No. Not GTK+'s implementation. The customer's application's implementation. - (possible) bugs found in underlying libraries that (might) need fixing, usually caused by bad or lacking documentation, or actual bugs. What's the question here? I think there's quite a bit of confusion there about what developer support is, so I'll rephrase it. It's gtk-app-devel-list or StackExchange with somebody on the other end that's being paid to answer you, and that can be sued if they don't deliver. Via e-mail. Or phone. Or through a web interface. All of this is quite a different proposition from providing a turn-key finished application, especially with the depth of the stack we provide. Not sure what you're saying here? I'm waiting to hear about your ideas on this. The above is, at best, hard to interpret. If you have a formal list of things to ask, please make it public here and I can reply certainly. Do you, or any other companies in the GNOME eco-system provide developer support as defined above? If not, then Andreas doesn't need to speak to Ryan, and the problem is solved. We wouldn't have a good case to edge companies that write their software in-house towards GTK+. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - February 15th, 2011
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 10:22 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Brian Cameron wrote: * Hardware o The System76 laptop will be made available to the new ED when hired. o A new laptop will be purchased to replace Rosanna's aging one. o ACTION: Paul will follow-up to acquire a laptop for Rosanna. Have you considered asking one of our advisory board partners to donate a laptop for the Executive Director? I believe that Tim Ney's laptop was donated in the past. It was discussed, but Rosanna's laptop died some time ago, and we cannot wait on donations to replace it. She's currently having to use a personal netbook, which is far from ideal for the work she does. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - December 23, 2010
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 16:07 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Brian Cameron wrote: New Items * GTK+/MeeGo project call for bids. o A bid was chosen and will be announced soon. Those who submitted bids have been contacted and told if their bid was selected or not. It's been 3 weeks since the meeting now - is there any chance of getting more information on the winning bid - ie. what will be done, by whom, and when? As a Maemo/MeeGo guy, this is *very* interesting to me. It will be done by me, as soon as possible some time this week. I was on holidays, and unable to set time aside to do all the work properly (which includes announcements, setting an agenda, and discussing how to deal with the relevant paperwork). FWIW, whether each bid was successful was communicated to the interested parties (the bidders) just before Christmas. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
GTK+/MeeGo Handset integration work, call for bids: Deadline
Following our call for bids less than a month ago, it turns out that most people work better under pressure [1]. So we have set a deadline date for the bids to come in. The date is Friday 19th November 2010. We'll likely start going through the bids the following week, so we're pretty flexible for what time we'll receive the bids, so you don't need to worry about timezones. Looking forward to receiving your bids! [1]: Note the tongue-in-cheek. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: SiS video cards and GNOME 3
On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 11:19 -0300, Jonh Wendell wrote: Hi, folks. As some of you might already know, the average computer in Brazil is shipped with SiS video card. Which doesn't have a proper X driver. So, most people in Brazil will not be able to run gnome-shell. They will simply not feel the GNOME 3 experience. (this includes myself, btw). The answer buy a better hardware just doesn't work here. We're talking about a development country (3rd world...). The fallback for gnome-shell is just to stick with gnome panel/metacity, which means GNOME 2 experience. I really feel bad about this. In every conversation I have, people keep asking/complaining about this issue. So, I'm wondering if the Foundation could, somehow, help in this area. Two ideas came up (not mutually exclusive): 1) Fund someone to writer a proper X org driver for SiS cards 2) Talk to SiS to solve the problem Ideas, suggestions? Given the statements at: http://ncc-1701a.homelinux.net/~linux-sis/index.php?page=Preface and the statements that used to be on Thomas Winischhofer's page (that page has disappeared now), you're better off talking to SiS directly, and making it clear that they will be made irrelevant in the Linux desktop business if they don't change their ways. I don't think it's up to GNOME to ensure that decent 3D drivers are available for each and every video cards available. The only thing that I can advise you is: - Contact SiS yourself about this - Advertise the fact that SiS based machines aren't suitable for Linux desktop usage - If you have a desktop machine, buy a supported card to put in it. If the latter isn't an option, the classic desktop will still be available on GNOME 3, and I would encourage you, and the others with the same problem, to focus on making it solid whilst waiting for better hardware, or better drivers. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
GTK+/MeeGo Handset integration work, call for bids
The GNOME Foundation is looking for developers to enhance the developer experience of using GTK+ to port and create applications on MeeGo Handset devices. Knowledge of the MeeGo Handset development process, and GTK+ internals will be required to carry out the work. The tasks to be achieved are: - Ensure that GTK+ applications display as expected on the MeeGo Handset platform, including checking that fixes to the compositor are made if necessary. - Add to upstream GTK+ helper functionality to create stand-alone GTK+ applications to run on MeeGo. - Merge Hildon widgets functionality into GTK+ upstream, where it makes sense to do so. The money available for the project is $50,000, and the bidder selection will be made by a group including professional consultants with GTK+ and MeeGo experience and GNOME Foundation Board members. Bids should include: - Results of testing stock GTK+ applications on the MeeGo Handset platform - Details of your research into what GTK+ functionality needs to be added to ease porting of stock applications to MeeGo Handset. - The list of widgets and functionality ported from Hildon to upstream GTK+, including a review of how the functionality would be integrated (extending existing widgets, new widgets, etc.) - A time line and schedule for the whole project - References to previous MeeGo, MeeGo Handset, Maemo, or GTK+ work. Note that the goal of the GNOME Foundation for this project is upstream acceptance of the various modifications made during the project. Please send your proposals to board-l...@gnome.org with the subject line MeeGo Handset Bid. Regards ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - August 19, 2010
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 10:48 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Brian Cameron wrote: * GNOME Trademarks o TM can claim without formal registration o Do we want a (R) registered trademark on the correct GNOME foot / logo? o GNOME foot (old) has a registered trademark o French website + ACTION: Bastien to send the French website a follow-up email about GNOME Trademarks Luis worked on cleaning up GNOME's trademark story around 2006-07 - it would be worthwhile asking him the current situation, since he is the one who took charge of the issue back then. As far as I know, we registered the GNOME foot + wordmark in the US through Wilson Sonsini. * Bastien - To contact some international banks for the possibility of a US-based dual-currency account (probably will not work, as Stormy already did research. Just a data point: Louis Desjardins mentioned to me recently that he has opened a CAD/USD/EUR account in Canada. I *guess* that international bank transfer charges will still be expensive. Except that the US banks seem to like providing below standard services. I completely failed to find a bank that would offer the type of services we're looking for, at a reasonable cost to us. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - July 25, 2010
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 15:42 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Bastien Nocera wrote: This is what we've been told by the people we talked to. MeeGo 1.0 for handsets uses a new compositor, with a new set of hints. Those are not compatible with existing desktop implementations. Trying to use a stock GTK+ or Qt application on MeeGo 1.0 for handsets will result in a black screen. Do you have any other information that contradicts that? After looking into it, I've been told that this is a bug in mcompositor, rather than a design issue: http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2953 o The board is considering funding making Maemo 6 integrate more nicely with GTK+. In the context, it seems like the task should be Ensuring that Maemo 5 apps work well with upstream GTK+? The first step would be fixing the compositor and/or adding support for this new compositor in GTK+ itself. The second would be to start porting some of the Maemo 5 GTK+ and Hildon features to GTK+. Yes, this certainly seems reasonable. But the bug in mcompositor seems sufficiently serious that it will have a high priority in mcompositor also (as mentioned in that bug report). I'm checking now whether it's in fact the same problem, and whether we'd need to fund fixing that bug, or whether it's a problem that MeeGo will solve of its own. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Meeting Minutes Published - July 25, 2010
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 10:58 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Brian Cameron wrote: * GNOME Mobile work funded by Nokia. o If Nokia continued with Maemo 5, then we could just port GNOME apps and they would likely just work. o With Maemo 6 and Moblin neither Qt nor GTK+ apps just work. This doesn't sound right... Qt apps and stock GTK+ apps should Just Work in both Maemo 6 and MeeGo 1.0. The issue, as I understand it, is that Hildon Nokia GTK+ apps developed against Maemo 5 currently have no migration path to Maemo 6/MeeGo. This is what we've been told by the people we talked to. MeeGo 1.0 for handsets uses a new compositor, with a new set of hints. Those are not compatible with existing desktop implementations. Trying to use a stock GTK+ or Qt application on MeeGo 1.0 for handsets will result in a black screen. Do you have any other information that contradicts that? o The board is considering funding making Maemo 6 integrate more nicely with GTK+. In the context, it seems like the task should be Ensuring that Maemo 5 apps work well with upstream GTK+? The first step would be fixing the compositor and/or adding support for this new compositor in GTK+ itself. The second would be to start porting some of the Maemo 5 GTK+ and Hildon features to GTK+. o ACTION: Bastien to discuss technical Nokia plans with regards to Meego for Handsets. o ACTION: Stormy to send Bastien contact details for Nokia Advisory Board. Cheers, Dave. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
GUADEC Feedback (we want it!)
Hello all, The GNOME Board of Directors, as mentioned briefly during this year's GUADEC closing ceremony, would like to invite you to give us your feedback about this year's (and possibly previous year's) GUADEC. We've already received some feedback for this year, and we'll be collating it into a Wiki page, which we'll make public as soon as reasonably acceptable. The feedback page on the Wiki will be editorialised, and the ideas and comments anonymous, unless you specifically request that they are not. So tell us how good or bad this year's GUADEC was at bo...@gnome.org Cheers /Bastien, on behalf of the GNOME Foundation Board ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Ensuring GNOME 3 is a Success
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 19:22 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote: Foundation Community: You let us know overwhelmingly that ensuring that GNOME 3 is a success is the #1 priority that the GNOME Foundation should be working on according to the survey Stormy ran last January.[1] I have some ideas on a marketing/hacking front, with checklist for applications to be able to self-certify as Ready for GNOME 3. I'll write a more complete e-mail later on. Feel free to nag me if I haven't written anything come Sunday evening. Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates : money !
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 15:11 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote: Lionel: I've a question about GNOME business model and sustanability. As we have seen with the fundrising to hire a sysadmin, money is often a blocking point. The current business model seems to be donations. Actually, The GNOME Foundation acquires money from several sources: - Advisory Board fees - Sponsorship for particular events or programs - Profit from events (such as GUADEC) - Donations (such as Friends of GNOME and the upcoming mobile donations program being discussed on the marketing list) snip awesome explanations And I'll add that there's some opportunities around referal and advertising revenue on the desktop itself (some of that revenue unfortunately being snatched by distributors), as well as trying to get some (recurring) donations from projects that depend on us (say, Mozilla Co. for the Linux related work). Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for Bastian Nocera
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 20:36 +0200, Javier Jardón wrote: Hello, in your application you say: - (Re-)defining GNOME: The Foundation charter defines GNOME as a loose collection of independent project, though we need to stop considering it as such if GNOME is to take an important role in the future of computing, be it on the desktop, or in devices, where it would provide the infrastructure. Could you elaborate a bit more about this? Look at the upper and lower bounds on this diagram for GNOME Mobile: http://www.gnome.org/mobile/gmae-arch-diag.png Where does GNOME start and stop? Do we go from the kernel up? From the user-space bits up? Is something still GNOME when it doesn't use GTK+? When it doesn't use Matchbox (as per the diagram), or metacity/mutter? I would think it being fine to say, GNOME is: - Linux kernel - D-Bus - NetworkManager/BlueZ/PolicyKit/udisks/upower - X11 all the way to GTK+/Clutter combination and apps And this is what we need to focus on. There's a lot of swamp-draining to be done in the lower levels, and working on GNOME means working on one of those things in the stack. In the same way, I think it doesn't shut out other OSes, be they other free Unices, or even Mac OS X and Windows, where the stack is just shifted (pretty much everything underneath what we currently consider the GNOME stack). Defining the GNOME OS is required if we want to avoid getting cornered working on the bits at the top of the stack, and working around problems, rather than solving the solutions The Right Way all the way down our stack. Obviously, this would require discussions... Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
