RIP old buddy!
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 7:45 AM Bartłomiej Piotrowski
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been looking at Bugzilla migration requests today and have some
> related announcements.
>
> First of all, if for some reason you are still using Bugzilla, you
> should stop and move to GitLab. I
Neil's blog post, for those missing it:
https://blog.halon.org.uk/2019/09/gnome-foundation-relationship-gnu-fsf/
For my part, I want to apologize to everyone involved in GNOME for not
pushing GNOME to formally sever its ties with GNU a decade ago, which is
the first time in my email archives I
This is terrific to see. I'm sorry that I probably don't have time to help
out much, but look forward to the final result.
Luis
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:49 PM Nuritzi Sanchez <
nurit...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
> Dear Foundation Members,
>
> GNOME has never had a standard code of conduct
Wikimedia has a pretty good "this week in", and it adds a lot of value. But
it is a lot of work to do well.
(I seem to recall we even used to have one in GNOME, though I can't find
evidence of that offhand. Would have been at least a decade ago.)
Luis
On Wed, May 18, 2016, 6:33 PM Michael
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
* ED search
?
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
Luis
worried that making the TODO list the Bountie list was
dangerous, because people might end up doing only the things
people pay for. Have we already started down this slop already
Perhaps a naive question, but I would have expected discussion of hiring a
new ED - is that being handled in a separate hiring committee?
Luis
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Andreas Nilsson li...@andreasn.se wrote:
Hello Foundation members!
Next board meeting is April 8th at 16:00 UTC
Terrific news!
And thanks also to all the supporters of the Foundation over the year
who have made this sort of hire possible - this investment in
infrastructure and support is extremely important to GNOME's long-term
health.
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote:
Didn't we have a map of member locations at some point? Or was that just
p.g.o blogs?
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jared Jennings jaredljenni...@gmail.comwrote:
Mike,
Thanks for the response. Shoot! Wish I had known that sooner. I've been in
Columbus for 3 weeks and will be back in Sept.
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
On 05/24/2012 06:49 PM, Joanmarie Diggs wrote:
* They are not familiar with -- and thus not comfortable teaching --
all the tools we use.
* They want certainty in terms of assignments and projects.
* They want
Brian-
Thanks for your selfless service the past few years. Your dedication,
including to some of the board's most thankless tasks, has been
admirable and will be very difficult for the board to replace.
Luis
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote:
That's great to hear! Congratulations to the long list of new members.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
this is the first time we actually receive so many membership's
applications in just two weeks and I'm glad to notice that
the GNOME Foundation is
Big thanks are due to Brian and SFLC for perservering with this.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote:
Foundation Members:
I am happy to report that the GNOME Foot logo currently used by GNOME
has been trademarked as Reg. # 4063108 filed November 29,
Thanks to all of you for doing a very important and very
underappreciated role in the project.
Luis
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Bruno Boaventura
brunoboavent...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
It was a pleasure for me hold the chairman position of Membership
Committee in the last two years.
2010/3/1 Stormy Peters sto...@gnome.org:
GNOME Foundation IRC meeting.
How did this go?
(And as for feedback: I think these are terrific; please keep them coming!)
Luis
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
On 1/17/10 6:52 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote:
GNOME has a policy (written or not) that prohibits importing non-free
software
into its repositories.
I'm not personally aware of a written policy to
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
On 1/17/10 6:52 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote:
GNOME has a policy (written or not) that prohibits importing non-free
software
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
On 1/17/10 12:48 PM, Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down.
That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear
and common
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 22:52 +, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
[CUT]
The last few mails in this thread suggest that people are happy with this
aspect of GNOME's philosophy. So it's something worth maintaining. How do
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 09:34 -0700, Stormy Peters wrote:
I believe we can state it this way ...
The GNOME Foundation believes in free software and promotes free
software but that does not mean that GNOME is
2009/12/14 Stormy Peters sto...@gnome.org:
Had a great GNOME Advisory Board meeting about events and copyright
assignments. The copyright assignment discussion in particular was very
dynamic.
Care to expand on that one? :)
Luis
___
foundation-list
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
On 12/14/2009 04:34 PM, Vincent Untz wrote:
Also, the GNU project is not the FSF. When reading the thread, I have
the feeling that some people want the GNOME project to not be part of
the FSF, or to disagree with the
2009/11/29 Stormy Peters sto...@gnome.org:
Worked on CRM data structures and work flows, i.e. I wrote up what we need
in the CRM system so that I can get help setting it up. (Jeff Schroeder
installed CiviCRM on GNOME systems!)
This is terrific to hear; definitely one of those baby-steps
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Richard Stallmanr...@gnu.org wrote:
Created some Amazon affiliate accounts in US, UK, Canada and Germany so
tha=
t
Jaap can set up stores and a Firefox widget that will enable people to
direct Amazon referral fees for their purchase to GNOME.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Luis Villal...@tieguy.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Richard Stallmanr...@gnu.org wrote:
Created some Amazon affiliate accounts in US, UK, Canada and Germany so
tha=
t
Jaap can set up stores and a Firefox widget that will enable people
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Philip Van Hoofpvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
Dear Richard,
An organizations like GNOME is free to decide for themselves which of
the online services they will use.
And as Richard is a member of GNOME (honorary if not in fact) he's
certainly welcome to politely
Neither california law nor our own various legal documents have anything
substantive to say on the issue.
Luis (not a lawyer; this is not legal advice)
On Jun 29, 2009 4:03 AM, Andy Tai a...@atai.org wrote:
Is it legal according to California law that the membership committee can
decide the
2009/6/11 Pierre-Luc Beaudoin pierre-...@pierlux.com:
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 11:12 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote:
I understand it every
other board meeting is held in public-but-moderated IRC; transcripts
are cleaned up and made available later.
That sounds like a good idea to me, if people in
Some months ago, when we were brining Stormy on board, she asked the
board about how she could be more transparent and involved in the
community, and IRC came up in that context.
One thing I said at the time, which may be worth revisiting if there
are general concerns about board transparency, is
[Apologies in my lack of interaction in this thread; I've just started
studying for the bar and have just moved to a place with no internet;
the combination has left me pretty brutally offline all week, as I
will be for most of the rest of the summer.]
2009/6/2 Jason D. Clinton
2009/6/5 Luis Villa luis.vi...@gmail.com:
At any rate, I agree completely that we need some strong leaders to develop
in GNOME. But the Foundation is not the place for it. I think the right
question is 'why have leaders not come from other sources? what can the
Foundation do, if anything
2009/6/7 Tobias Mueller mue...@auftrags-killer.org:
Dear Foundation Members,
I am announcing a new timeline for the upcoming Foundation Board
Elections because we, the Membership and Elections Committee, couldn't
hold the deadlines. We are very sorry for that.
Given that the board forced
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak
m...@avtechpulse.com wrote:
I would like to see greater financial and administrative transparency. I
...
I want to see seven board members actively communicating, and I want to
...
front, don't fight in public, and
www.hackerthreads.com/go.asp?Cc=GNOME
?
2009/4/30 Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me:
Can we get a magnetic car gnome foot? I would totally pay for one of those
and a best of sri rupert quotes t-shirt. Although you probably dont' want
to put a GNOME foot logo wtih that. :)
sri
ps I
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
Am Montag, den 02.02.2009, 20:07 -0500 schrieb Luis Villa:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Just replying to what I said
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:06 AM, buzz davidb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
I have come across a piece of software that appears to violate the GPL (and
possibly the LGPL).
I am attempting to advise you all, as instructed in the following link:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html
for amendment.) So I think if the board wants to change this,
we can do it, but obviously we'd (1) want to get feedback and (2) we'd
want to ensure that there is bandwidth to ensure that the new process
works.
Luis
-- Forwarded message --
From: Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org
Date: Sat
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
Shaun McCance wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 19:27 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Selon Claudio Saavedra csaave...@alumnos.utalca.cl:
http://www.randomimage.us
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
Hi,
Shaun McCance wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 19:27 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Selon Claudio Saavedra csaave...@alumnos.utalca.cl:
http://www.randomimage.us/
I think that would be some kind of copyright infringment (IANAL).
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Gregory Leblanc
headmaster.albus.dumbled...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks, couple of comments and questions below.
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
[snip]
Diego Escalante Urrelo will be joining the board as a new member for
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Dave Neary wrote:
I've fixed it, I think - I removed Known: from the end of the ACL.
So, I didn't fix anything :] No rights to edit the ACL.
Jeff moved the Known: to the end earlier, which should fix the problem,
but
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do have one question. I don't mean to be a shit-stirrer or anything,
yes you do. :)
but it's not clear from the minutes of the past few board meetings what,
if any, priorities the board is attacking systematically this
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Davyd Madeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's forbidden!
That's a problem now, isn't it... [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luis
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 01:11:05AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
My apologies that this has taken so long; I've been behind
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Davyd Madeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's forbidden!
That's a problem now, isn't it... [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So, it turns out that if you're logged out altogether (as I
Welcome to the new members, and a big thanks to Brunco and the
Membership Committee for taking on this important task.
Luis
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Bruno Boaventura [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everybody!
The GNOME Foundation Membership Committee is pleased to present the new mem=
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 09:21:51AM -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
* Meeting w/ KDE about GUADEC/Akademy 2009 being scheduled for early
September in Berlin.
So instead of trying to push for earlier in the year we're delaying
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Kalle Vahlman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Haven't seen this brought up yet, so thought I'd ask (out if curiosity
mainly)...
Since the recent Intel aquisition of OpenedHand, there now is in
essence two entries for Intel in the Advisory Board.
There doesn't
Hi, all-
It is my pleasure to announce that the Board has decided to hire
Stormy Peters as Executive Director of the Foundation. We've been in
talks with her for some time and feel that she has an ideal
combination of skills and background to fill the role, having been
involved with GNOME and
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Minutes get sent to foundation-announce:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-announce/
Aha. Then part of the problem would be solved by updating:
http
Minutes get sent to foundation-announce:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-announce/
The last two meetings were not minuted because they were on a private
board-only matter; I've been meaning to send an announcement to
foundation-announce about that, but exams have made it difficult for
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Minutes get sent to foundation-announce:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-announce/
The last two meetings were not minuted because they were on a private
board-only matter; I've been meaning to send an announcement
I might suggest that this is a completely unproductive discussion that
should go off-list until someone actually has a solid proposal on the
table from a politically/morally/ethically/whatever-ly questionable
regime. We've all got better things to do than to rehash potentially
important but
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Bruno Boaventura [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Jonh Wendell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, It would be really, really, amazing!
GUADLAC, as Behdad suggested. A GNOME Conference in Americas, with the
same structure as
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Germán Poó-Caamaño [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For what it is worth, we have discussed GUADLAC in previous years (I
think as far back as 2004, maybe 2003?) but it typically foundered on
travel costs, which were always unacceptably high for some large group
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I guess most people have read various blog posts about how the GTK+
hackfest went, and I've heard there'll be a small report about it too.
But the general feeling seems to be that it was really useful.
One of the
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trademark applications: are there plans to do any of those this year?
Yes, as a result of errors made in the last round of US trademark
application- basically, our registered mark is the old (pre-2.0) foot
rather than the new
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 8:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear foundation members,
What is the policy of contributing to the GNOME project and expected
copyright
assignment?
I am Alexander Shopov and I act as a co-ordinator of the Bulgarian Gnome
translation team.
Up till now, the
[Speaking purely as a Foundation member and not as a member of the
Board; I've not discussed this with the Board at all.]
Some years ago the Foundation considered the use of preferential
voting to select the board. At the time I opposed it, for reasons I
don't fully recall but which in retrospect
On Jan 27, 2008 12:01 PM, Kalle Vahlman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/1/27, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Oddly, they don't use it on their website (assuming that is supposed
to be for igloo.info.) Do you remember what event they were
advertising for?
igloo.mobi exists too, and is some
On Dec 4, 2007 11:55 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard, I also like to see you show up in the GNOME Advisory Board
meetings and mailing list as FSF's representative.
Does that require travel, or can it be done by phone?
Typically by phone, though once annually by
On Dec 3, 2007 1:11 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If people are going to be looking at licenses, I would very
much like to discuss the FDL v2, and our usage of the FDL in
general. There are some troublesome parts whose implications
for GNOME aren't clear to me.
On Nov 30, 2007 3:56 PM, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If people are going to be looking at licenses, I would very
much like to discuss the FDL v2, and our usage of the FDL in
general. There are some troublesome parts whose implications
for GNOME aren't clear to me.
My immediate
On Nov 30, 2007 3:51 PM, Shaun McCance [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 14:54 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
On Nov 26, 2007 10:28 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. How do you think the GNOME Foundation should support the Free
Software Movement in general?
I
On Nov 29, 2007 5:59 AM, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote who=Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
I think you're way too harsh on people who actually concluded things like:
Sorry, but the negativity of that site greatly outweighs the positive. It
takes more than a little sucking up to earn
On Nov 29, 2007 8:31 AM, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 1:33 PM, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 5:59 AM, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote who=Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
I think you're way too harsh on people who actually concluded
On Nov 29, 2007 10:37 AM, Jonathan Blandford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 15:54 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Luis Villa wrote:
Jeff has ably debunked this particular fiction already in the thread,
and more generally ably debunked the FUD that Novell somehow controls
On Nov 28, 2007 7:15 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see how the foundation can 'make sure' of anything in this
instance. It can not force developers towards or away from either
spec. That is simply not in it's mandate.
I may be being obtuse, but what's not
On Nov 26, 2007 10:28 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Would you change anything in the GNOME Foundation statement about
OOXML?
I wish it were more explicit about how the Foundation feels that the
ODF folks have been undermining the standards process. It isn't
obvious to
On Nov 22, 2007 5:52 PM, Anne Østergaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Questions to the candidates:
Will you apply for the position as new Executive Director for GNOME?
Will you apply for any paid position within GNOME while serving as board
member?
For those who don't know, before going to law
On Nov 22, 2007 12:11 PM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you see as the best way to spend this money? In terms of hiring,
do you prefer hiring a sysadmin, or an executive director? What other
priorities do you have for expenditure this year, outside of our usual
cost centers
On Nov 21, 2007 11:24 AM, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Find a way to better track what the board is currently dealing with,
so nothing gets forgotten. I've tried doing this only with mails and
some notes here and there, but without success. It should be done in a
much stricter
On Nov 19, 2007 5:39 AM, Bruno Boaventura [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://foundation.gnome.org/elections/2007/candidates.html
Note: I have a very unusual/atypical candidacy statement.
I've sent one clarification in response to questions in IRC. If anyone
has more questions, please *please* send
and processes that outlive my term on
the board.
Hope that helps-
Luis
On Nov 16, 2007 2:31 PM, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This announcement is available with better formatting at
http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/10/31/running-for-the-gnome-foundation-board/
I'll be running again for the Board
On 11/1/07, Andy Tai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OOXML will be a de facto standard entirely due to Microsoft's dominant
position in the computing industry... the fight is about preventing it to be
a formal standard.
I remain open to being convinced (1) that that distinction matters and
(2) that
On 10/31/07, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote who=Luis Villa
I'm hesitant to declare it a failure until I see more evidence that
delegation has been tried and failed. For example, I could do this sort of
thing without being on the board at all- no need to appoint me to the
board
On 10/31/07, Andy Tai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not quiet... you don't join ECMA TC45 to prevent OOXML from becoming a
standard.
OOXML is going to be the defacto standard whether we like it or not.
To pretend otherwise is to deny that the sun will rise in the East
tomorrow.
So our options can
On 10/31/07, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote who=Luis Villa
I am frustrated, and so I will be running for the board again.
If elected, my almost-exclusive focus will be handling legal and
secretarial issues for the board. So I can't guarantee that my being on
the board would
On 6/10/07, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/10/07, Jody Goldberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 08:18:54PM -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) ECMA
We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
On 10/16/07, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm certainly not against moving to STV, but that would need software,
and considerable retraining for members not familiar with the system.
http://selectricity.org/
open + easy.
___
foundation-list
On 9/12/07, Tristan Van Berkom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That way you get democracy at both ends - posting and viewing.
GNOME is not democratic. :-)
Well, gnome is people that have a choice to contribute or not - making
those people (i.e. you me and everyone else) feel accepted and
On 8/6/07, Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kjartan Maraas wrote:
Is there a rule of thumb as to how much code is contributed before this
applies? I've always assumed that writing new code gives you the right
to add yourself, but fixing bugs in existing code is a different matter?
On 8/3/07, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Wood wrote:
During discussions about copyright at GUADEC several people mentioned
that developers were not encouraged to assign copyright to the GNOME
Foundation.
From my point of view, not encouraged isn't the way I see
On 8/3/07, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:48 +0200, Juan José Sánchez Penas wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 01:40:39PM -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
ownership. When multiple companies (Red Hat, Novell, Sun, ...) own
copyright on a package, it's harder to
On 6/10/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) ECMA
We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
member. Jody has expressed an interest in being a representative
for GNOME, and suggested it would also be good to get someone
there from Abiword.
ACTION: Behdad
On 6/10/07, Jody Goldberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 08:18:54PM -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) ECMA
We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
member. Jody has expressed an interest in being
On 3/23/07, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 15:14 +0200, Baris Cicek wrote:
I'll talk w/ our local GUG about if we can organize to host GUADEC next
year in Istanbul.
Please, yes.
Please, no. Not until I can come. Istanbul 2010! ;)
Luis (seriously, Istanbul
On 3/24/07, Baris Cicek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 07:04 -0700, Elliot Lee wrote:
Baris Cicek wrote:
I'll talk w/ our local GUG about if we can organize to host GUADEC next
year in Istanbul.
Not Constantinople?
It was called Constantinople ages ago, afaik, but
On 11/28/06, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote who=Shaun McCance
I also want to throw in a strong endorsement for Joachim.
I'm a little concerned -- based on Joachim's answers and commments on this
list -- that there would be some difficult philosophical gaps for the Board
to
On 6/1/06, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anne wrote:
[snip]
I do not say this to start a new long debat in this tread. But it has
become obvious that the 1% participation of women in FLOSS is
embarrassing and we need to have a look at why this is the case and make
some cultural
I would hate to see us resort to written, legalistic rules (which
encourage gaming and letter-of-law over spirit-of-law) when a strong
culture should suffice, particularly at our size. What it feels like
such a thing advertises is 'we're so weak we need rules where common
sense and politeness
On 5/16/06, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ Portland project
- general feeling of nearly everyone was that it's sad that GNOME is
not involved in this effort
- would be nice to get someone to at least look at the project and
provide feedback
- Waldo and some KDE
On 5/15/06, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Selon Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sul, 2006-05-14 at 19:52 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
Since lawyers talk .doc, and use revision control to track changes to the
documents, that's what we ge too.
Disappointing. I hope the foundation will
On 4/17/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
* Luis to help marketing-list prepare a press release for the
GNOME/W3C SVG anouncement (NOT DONE)
Not sure if I should just wait for the press release, but what's this?
Heh. I took
On 2/24/06, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le mercredi 22 février 2006 à 12:12 +0100, Rodrigo Moya a écrit :
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 14:24 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
Axis Informática
* We are fine with giving them permission to sell products with the
On 2/27/06, Bill Haneman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 13:48, Dave Neary wrote:
...
I think it'd be a good idea to get a proper legal opinion on defending our
marks, and setting up our trademark policy to be as liberal as possible
without
losing them.
I agree. I
On 12/17/05, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About Ray's package and Luis Villa's post:
http://tieguy.org/blog/index.cgi/524
I think the Foundation needs official logos owned by the Foundation to
be used by the official GNOME projects in order to give consistancy to
the GNOME brand.
But
suggested this in my paper, though I forgot about it this
morning. I believe Debian is not substantially pleased with this
approach ATM, though I forget why- any debianites care to
elaborate/correct me?
Luis
Luis Villa wrote:
Trademark law doesn't give us the flexibility we want, which leaves us
On 12/17/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/17/05, Bill Haneman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Luis:
IMO there may be yet another option, i.e. the 'Debian' route, where we
have one logo package (the default?) that's not trademarked (though IMO
the 'GNOME' name should remain
On 12/17/05, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sad, 2005-12-17 at 11:32 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
IANAL (yet), but... under US trademark law (and most European
trademark law, as I understand it) basically all users of the mark
must ask us for permission before use. We cannot adopt
On 12/17/05, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 18:30 +, Alan Cox wrote:
[snip]
Having a logo for a program which is a
gnome program and for gnome developer ought to be doable given the
right definition, and foundation member is definitely one that can be
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
