The meeting minutes for the May 10th GNOME Foundation board
meeting is now published. Refer here:
http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes/20110510
Other past board meetings are archived here:
http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes
-- text of the latest
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 16:47 -0700, Andre Klapper wrote:
>
> All teams (whether defined ones or informal) in GNOME should rather be
> encouraged to publish meeting minutes (not full logs but summaries) on
> the wiki and announce them on the appropriate mailing lists (and on
> personal blogs).
> Thi
Hi,
Le lundi 23 mai 2011, à 15:55 +0100, Martyn Russell a écrit :
> On 23/05/11 15:08, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> >Martyn Russell a écrit:
> >
> >>
> >>That's always needed too of course, but when you have potential
> >>customers asking who can provide support for projects X, Y and Z, do
> >>you rea
Hi Johannes,
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:30 +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote:
> > Plus sometimes I would have prefered to see more transparency in GNOME
> > with regard to decision making on our sometimes bumpy way to GNOME 3.0
> > so one task will be to find ways to facilitate.
>
> Do you think it woul
Hi,
Le lundi 16 mai 2011, à 17:58 +0200, Tobias Mueller a écrit :
> Also many thanks to openSuSE for their Live DVDs. They were highly
> appreciated and we could use them very efficiently to attract people and
> start conversations.
> If you happen to want a box of DVDs, contact me or Vincent. We'
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your answers. They were thoughtful, as you are.
On Mon 23 May 2011 22:38, Ryan Lortie writes:
> More generally, though, during the last cycle I've heard a lot of talk
> from many different people about many decisions that seemed to be made
> in an opaque way. The removal o
hi Andy,
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 20:58 +0200, Andy Wingo wrote:
> > For a while the foundation board has largely taken a hands-off approach
> > when it comes to technical decisions. In my opinion this has allowed a
> > number of problems to develop.
>
> Can you mention some examples?
The most pr
Hi Ryan,
On Mon 23 May 2011 02:00, Ryan Lortie writes:
> For a while the foundation board has largely taken a hands-off approach
> when it comes to technical decisions. In my opinion this has allowed a
> number of problems to develop.
Can you mention some examples?
> I believe, however, that
I appreciate that we are talking about the technical board as an "open
question" but I fear it could be used as a political tool to override
the decision making process that already exists in the meritocracy.
By giving a board this power you basically allow people who may not
even be active in vari
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 13:51 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Philip,
>
> (keeping in mind that creating a technical board is very much an open
> question)
>
> On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 19:48 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > - Will all foundation members get a single vote?
>
> That was indeed my inte
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 11:00 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:59 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> > * 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 ca
hi Philip,
(keeping in mind that creating a technical board is very much an open
question)
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 19:48 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> - Will all foundation members get a single vote?
That was indeed my intention.
I think your other proposals are too difficult to implement and
[removing foundation-announce from the cc:]
hi Allan,
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:59 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> * 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
On 23/05/11 15:08, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Martyn Russell a écrit:
That's always needed too of course, but when you have potential
customers asking who can provide support for projects X, Y and Z, do
you really want to be in a position where you have no answer?
Oh, you mean when a potential c
On 23/05/11 15:28, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Martyn Russell a écrit:
On 23/05/11 12:02, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:29 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote:
It is not only about having a page that list the
commercial support companies. It's more about a deep collaboration
between the
Martyn Russell a écrit:
> On 23/05/11 12:02, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:29 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote:
>>> 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
Martyn Russell a écrit:
>
> That's always needed too of course, but when you have potential
> customers asking who can provide support for projects X, Y and Z, do
> you really want to be in a position where you have no answer?
Oh, you mean when a potential customer comes to the /Foundation Board
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:59 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> 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
Hi Ryan,
Ryan Lortie wrote:
> name: Ryan Lortie
> nick: desrt
> affiliation: Codethink Limited
>
> I am announcing my intention to run as a candidate in the upcoming
> election for the board of directors.
>
>
> (( me ))
>
> I've been around the GNOME project for a bit more
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Isn't that part of the problem? If the foundation isn't behind this, won't
> it seem completely self indulgent on behalf of businesses alone?
>
> What I personally would like to see is much more backing from the
> foundation. E.g.
>
> - A w
On 23/05/11 13:43, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
Lionel Dricot a écrit:
At Lanedo, we have been surprised a few times by people who were
thinking that there was no commercial support available for GTK+. We
have heard of companies switching to Qt because Qt was guaranteed by a
company.
Things like tha
On 23/05/11 12:02, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 09:29 +0200, Lionel Dricot wrote:
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
Lionel Dricot a écrit:
> At Lanedo, we have been surprised a few times by people who were
> thinking that there was no commercial support available for GTK+. We
> have heard of companies switching to Qt because Qt was guaranteed by a
> company.
>
> Things like that clearly show a lack of communic
On 19 May 2010, at 19:08, Brian Cameron wrote:
> * I am affiliated with Oracle (formerly Sun Microsystems) where I work
> as a senior engineer on the OpenSolaris Desktop team.
For the avoidance of doubt, I guess this should say "the Solaris Desktop team",
as the OpenSolaris product is no long
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 withou
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 some
Le dimanche 22 mai 2011 à 23:44 -0400, Richard Stallman a écrit :
> At Lanedo, we have been surprised a few times by people who were
> thinking that there was no commercial support available for GTK+.
>
> It would make good sense for GNOME to have a list of commercial
> service providers. It
Hi Andre!
> Plus sometimes I would have prefered to see more transparency in GNOME
> with regard to decision making on our sometimes bumpy way to GNOME 3.0
> so one task will be to find ways to facilitate.
Do you think it would be useful for GNOME to have a policy that things
that haven't been di
28 matches
Mail list logo
