Em 14-12-2009 00:26, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 13:34 +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
Em 13-12-2009 12:44, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
Richard's claim that proprietary is illegitimate is enforcement. He's
making a philosophic mistake that contradicts his own ideology
Hi!
Respect is earned, not due. You haven't behaved in a way that deserves
my respect.
Both of you: The Code of Conduct is in affect for the mailing lists, so
stick to it. That's even more important when you discuss about a Code
for the Planet...
Regards,
Johannes
signature.asc
Hello,
GNOME is not connected with the anti-hunting movement; there's no
reason it should have any position on the question. But GNOME is part
of the GNU Project, and it ought to support the free software
movement. The most minimal support for the free software movement is
to refrain from
2009/12/10 Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org:
The presence of articles discussing vmware, for instance,
conveys the message that GNOME sees nothing wrong with it.
I think you've added 1 and 1 and made 7.
Richard.
___
foundation-list mailing list
Hi everyone,
As for the last few years, we'll have a GNOME devroom next year at FOSDEM
(6/7
feb in Brussels), and as always, we want *YOU* to give a talk about
the cool project you are hacking on in this devroom
During this week-end, we'll have half a day dedicated to GNOME specific
talks,
and
Am Dienstag, den 08.12.2009, 15:24 -0500 schrieb Dr. Michael J.
Chudobiak:
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Say, any viewer of p.g.o can vote a post +1 or -1. Then we can gather
two metrics per poster: 1) how impactful his/her posts are (avg / median
/ max number of votes). 2) how interested are
Hi,
Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
As a specific example, to the question, Do you agree that viewing
proprietary software as 'illegitimate', 'immoral', 'antisocial' and/or
'unethical' should be a pre-condition for syndication on Planet GNOME?, so
far 151 respondents have answered No, only 19 have
Hi,
Stormy and the Board worked on creating a new list of roles and
responsibilities for the advisory board, since what we had before was
quite old.
This has now been posted on the Foundation website at
http://foundation.gnome.org/about/advisoryboard/
Feel free to suggest improvements on the
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
GNOME, both as a community and as a foundation, should teach the good
examples and critic the bad ones.
GNOME should stick to teaching the good examples. Criticizing the bad
ones is only counter productive.
*
http://blogs.gnome.org/foundation/2009/12/14/stormys-update-week-of-december-7th/
http://www.stormyscorner.com/2009/12/stormys-update-week-of-december-7th.html
***
Answered a lot of emails and had a lot of discussions. As for things I
actually crossed off my todo list:
- Updated CiviCRM
Le mercredi 09 décembre 2009, à 19:47 +0100, Dodji Seketeli a écrit :
Le mer. 09 déc. 2009 à 14:45:55 (+0100), Philip Van Hoof a écrit:
This is nonsense. The planet-gnome slogan is:
Planet GNOME is __ a window into the world, work and lives __ of GNOME
hackers and contributors.
This
Hey,
Le mercredi 09 décembre 2009, à 13:32 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :
On 12/09/2009 08:48 AM, Lionel Dricot wrote:
- Each GNOME member should be able to add his feed to pgo. He might want
to change his feed whenever he wants to take a more specialized one or not.
The consensus in the
Le vendredi 11 décembre 2009, à 17:20 +0100, Philip Van Hoof a écrit :
I propose to have a vote on GNOME's membership to the GNU project.
So, as far as I can tell, nobody is collecting a list of members who
support such a vote proposal. I still wanted to reply there.
For many of the reasons
Hey,
Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009, à 07:46 -0700, Stormy Peters a écrit :
My post on hunting comes to mind. I self censor now because I didn't like
the negative comments directed at my kids. But would you block my whole blog
because a vocal portion of the community is anti-hunting and people in
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
Hi,
(This is hopefully my last mail for catching up with this thread ;-))
Le mercredi 25 novembre 2009, à 12:48 +, Lucas Rocha a écrit :
Hi all,
The Board has recently received some complaints from members of the
community about certain the inappropriate behaviors. In the context of
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 FSF. The GNOME Foundation is part of
the FSF, and we sometimes disagree with
Le mercredi 25 novembre 2009, à 17:35 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :
I also like to see two more ideas added to CoC:
- Learn to agree to disagree.
- Criticize ideas, not people presenting them.
I support this change.
I'm just unsure how we can update the Code of Conduct, since
Le lundi 14 décembre 2009, à 16:56 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :
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 FSF.
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
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 22:56 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Should we just version the Code of Conduct? Or is this
a non-issue?
I believe we don't need to update the Code since those 2 additions are
expected behaviours from the existing Be respectful and considerate
element.
Maybe should these 2
On 12/14/2009 05:26 PM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
But what if advocating free software means that the minimal support
GNOME should do for GNU, is to claim that proprietary is illegitimate?
Exactly.
I have been supporting Free Software for over ten years, and will probably do
for the rest of my
Hi all,
It's quite obvious that the original thread ended up branching into
several separate topics. I thought it would be useful to summarize
some of the key points on each topic in an attempt to bring a more
practical perspective to the whole discussion.
This is not an official message from
[/me removes board hat]
Hi everyone,
I like to ask for your support in my petition for referendum to make
foundation-list archives private and membership limited to actual Foundation
members. If we make that change we would be able to discuss matters freely
without making lots of news that
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
[/me removes board hat]
Hi everyone,
I like to ask for your support in my petition for referendum to make
foundation-list archives private and membership limited to actual Foundation
members. If we make that change
Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so,
can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to
foundation-list and the value you see in it.
Also, maybe someone with list admin privileges could tell us roughly the
number of subscribers and
On 15/12/2009, at 2:49 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
[/me removes board hat]
Hi everyone,
I like to ask for your support in my petition for referendum to make
foundation-list archives private and membership limited to actual
Foundation members. If we make that change we would be able to
2009/12/15 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so,
can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to
foundation-list and the value you see in it.
Hi there.
I'm not a GNOME Foundation member
2009/12/14 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so,
can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to
foundation-list and the value you see in it.
Yes.
I'm not a Foundation member, but I am on
On 12/14/2009 10:20 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
As long as GNOME is a project that matters, there will always be bozos
who will post uneducated articles about what you are doing. If your
discussions are in the open, people who really care can see what was
*really* said and help to keep those
quote who=Behdad Esfahbod
[/me removes board hat]
Hi everyone,
I like to ask for your support in my petition for referendum to make
foundation-list archives private and membership limited to actual
Foundation members. If we make that change we would be able to discuss
matters freely
On 12/14/09 7:14 PM, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier j...@zonker.net wrote:
2009/12/14 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so,
can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to
foundation-list and the
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:19 AM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
[/me removes board hat]
I like to ask for your support in my petition for referendum to make
foundation-list archives private and membership limited to actual Foundation
members. If we make that change we would be able
On 12/15/2009 12:23 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
In any case, journalist-impersonators like Mr. Varghese are going to write a
load of smack, no matter what, even if they have to simply invent it. After
all, they have in the past.
Given that all the past incidents I can think of involve that same
2009/12/15 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so,
can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to
foundation-list and the value you see in it.
Pick me! :-) I just like to follow what
I am one of those old farts on foundation list (first e-mail in my gfnd
folder is from Sep 19 2000). I left foundation because I thought I was
not contributing (I did some i18n work, while I had free time). I was
following the recent controversy closely. I am with Dave Neary on a
subject of that
On 12/15/2009 01:50 AM, Sergey Panov wrote:
Politics aside, what was Lefty(Open source advocate for ACCESS Co.,
Ltd.) and Philip Van Hoof (self-appointed propitiatory software
advocate) contribution to GNOME in the last year? Are those two still
members of the foundation?
As per Code of
It seems that a better idea is to consider the Planet not part of GNOME.
That way GNOME does not have to deal with whatever is in the planet, like
slashdot does not control and is not responsible for the messages by its
posters.
GNOME controls the official web page content. This planet is not
On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 01:56 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
As per Code of Conduct, please assume people mean well. Which both Lefty and
Philip do.
Sorry, if I managed to brake some CoC. I have no idea what you mean by
mean well, but their attack on RMS was quite tasteless.
Philip is a
On 12/14/09 11:35 PM, Sergey Panov si...@sipan.org wrote:
Nothing personal, but I never trusted those corporate Open Source
Advocates ... .
No offense taken, I'm sure... I fear you distrust a fair proportion of the
Foundation's Advisory Board.
Besides, Lefty does not work for ACCESS Inc.
40 matches
Mail list logo
