On 4/13/07, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm saying that I believe the secrecy is clearly and *obviously* warranted
> in these cases, simply due to the nature of the examples. We can't give you
> sensitive employment information "after the fact" so you can determine
> whether it shoul
> Probably very little difference. I would have contributed my time in much
> the same way, with the Board as a conduit (one of its most important roles),
> and myself as an external contributor rather than an internal contributor.
Oh, and I should mention: This would work in much the same way t
> El sáb, 14-04-2007 a las 04:12 +1000, Jeff Waugh escribió:
>
> > I am particularly sensitive to the issues you've raised here, and
> > they've been at the top of my mind working on this over the last 9 or so
> > months. I am satisfied that it has been consultative (with a particular
> > subset
Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> El sáb, 14-04-2007 a las 04:12 +1000, Jeff Waugh escribió:
>
>> I am particularly sensitive to the issues you've raised here, and they've
>> been at the top of my mind working on this over the last 9 or so months. I
>> am satisfied that it has been consultative (wit
El sáb, 14-04-2007 a las 04:12 +1000, Jeff Waugh escribió:
> I am particularly sensitive to the issues you've raised here, and they've
> been at the top of my mind working on this over the last 9 or so months. I
> am satisfied that it has been consultative (with a particular subset of the
> commun
CELF Embedded Linux Conference
Sometimes Linux is used alone in embedded systems, without the GNU
system. However, when a project is thinking of using GNOME, it must
plan to use the GNU/Linux system, not Linux alone.
Would you please help inform the visitors to the booth about this, and
ad
> Yes, you did give some of these examples, and I agree that there are
> situations within these broad categories that would require some level of
> secrecy. But the fact that we don't know any of the details means that
> there is still not enough information for me to judge whether the secrecy
Hi,
Dan Winship wrote:
> Or, if the GNOME Foundation is going to start behaving like Apple, how
> about we set up a "gnomerumors" web site and forum, where people can
> post rumors anonymously and try to figure out what the Board is up to
> before the official announcements?
While the board (and
On 4/13/07, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > There may be legitimate reasons for some degree of secrecy, but there is
> > no information for us as foundation members to judge for ourselves whether
> > that secrecy is warranted. It essentially all boils down to: "trust us,
> > we're g
As a footnote, I'm pretty sure one of the original reasons we created
the board back in the day was to be able to do things like this - give
GNOME a way to coordinate press releases without "breaking" them (press
releases simply don't work if discussed in public in advance). Another
reason for
> There may be legitimate reasons for some degree of secrecy, but there is
> no information for us as foundation members to judge for ourselves whether
> that secrecy is warranted. It essentially all boils down to: "trust us,
> we're good people".
I thought I provided some pretty good informati
On 4/13/07, Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:42 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
> >
> > Seriously though, this "surprise announcement" stuff is exactly the sort
> > of behavior that the community despises when Novell[1] and Red Hat[2] do
> > it, and now we're doing it
Dan Winship wrote:
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>> Those paying close attention over the last 12 months will have a fair idea
>> what this is about, but please resist the temptation to reply to this post
>> about it, as we're hoping to keep it under wraps until Thursday. :-)
>>
>
> Or, if the GNOM
> Seriously though, this "surprise announcement" stuff is exactly the sort
> of behavior that the community despises when Novell[1] and Red Hat[2] do
> it, and now we're doing it to ourselves???
So, when it's announced, you'll find that it's not at all like dumping lumps
of code on the community
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 13:42 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
>
> Seriously though, this "surprise announcement" stuff is exactly the sort
> of behavior that the community despises when Novell[1] and Red Hat[2] do
> it, and now we're doing it to ourselves???
What's wrong with building up some hype? Ma
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> Those paying close attention over the last 12 months will have a fair idea
> what this is about, but please resist the temptation to reply to this post
> about it, as we're hoping to keep it under wraps until Thursday. :-)
Or, if the GNOME Foundation is going to start behaving
Hi all,
Some of you may have noticed a new teaser on the front page of www.gnome.org
today - it's about an event we're holding next Thursday, April 19th in Santa
Clara, California, USA.
If you're a GNOME lover living nearby, come down to see us. There will be a
bunch of hackerly GNOME folks there
17 matches
Mail list logo
