Re: GNOME Travel Committee & Travel Policy: A proposal for consideration and feedback

[Stormy Peters]

You just need to let the committee know that you need to be reimbursed
quickly and come to an agreement before hand. While it takes time for
everyone to get their receipts in and us to reimburse them, we can make
arrangements beforehand to accommodate people that have a specific need.
(Knowing what you need ahead of time, getting your receipts in quickly, and
making sure your estimates match what you asked for all help!)

Quicker turnaround and being able to accommodate people are some of the
things we hope the travel committee will be able to address better.

Stormy

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Hubert Figuiere  wrote:

> Stormy Peters wrote:
> > Proposed policy: Total transportation and lodging minus €200 or 15%
> > (which ever is greater.) The amount to be agreed on before hand
> > between the travel committee and the traveler. Documented on the
> > application form.
> >
> > Please let us know your thoughts or if you'd like to help out on the
> > travel committee.
>
> What about "cash-flow"
>
> If you demographics for travel assistance is people that don't have much
> fund, they requiring them to pay upfront the airfare several month in
> advance to eventually partially reimburse them later isn't very useful.
> Cash-strapped is cash-strapped.
>
> Not to be picky or antyhing but if today I'm offered to get sponsored to
> go to a conference but have to pay upfront and wait several month to get
> reimbursed, I'd refuse.
>
> Just giving my feedback.
>
> Hub
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: GNOME Travel Committee & Travel Policy: A proposal for consideration and feedback

[Hubert Figuiere]

Stormy Peters wrote:
> Proposed policy: Total transportation and lodging minus €200 or 15%
> (which ever is greater.) The amount to be agreed on before hand
> between the travel committee and the traveler. Documented on the
> application form.
> 
> Please let us know your thoughts or if you'd like to help out on the
> travel committee.

What about "cash-flow"

If you demographics for travel assistance is people that don't have much
fund, they requiring them to pay upfront the airfare several month in
advance to eventually partially reimburse them later isn't very useful.
Cash-strapped is cash-strapped.

Not to be picky or antyhing but if today I'm offered to get sponsored to
go to a conference but have to pay upfront and wait several month to get
reimbursed, I'd refuse.

Just giving my feedback.

Hub
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: GNOME Travel Committee & Travel Policy: A proposal for consideration and feedback

[Dave Neary]

Hi,

Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> What should people who want to apply for Gran Caneria GUADEC do at
> this point? Also, it seems like anyone who might ask for help at some
> point in the future would be someone who shouldn't sit on the
> committee (to avoid accusation of COI).

We haven't finalised registration yet - which we probebly should before
opening up to sponsorship requests (only because handling this by email
would be a mess & run the risk of falling through the cracks).

We also need to make a couple of decisions on the budget, so that we
know how much money, at a minimum, we have to spend on travel.
Unfortunately, that's dragging on a bit, par for the course, but I'm
trying to get at least a low-ball figure everyone can agree to so that
we can get started.

The travel form from Stormy is also clearly suitable for GUADEC - I
anticipate that when we get a finalised agreement in place, we'll have
sorted out budget concerns to my satisfaction, and if there isn't fast
enough progress on a registration system, we should just proceed with email.

Short answer, wait a week or two.

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
Dave Neary
GNOME Foundation member
dne...@gnome.org
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: GNOME Travel Committee & Travel Policy: A proposal for consideration and feedback

[Jason D. Clinton]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Stormy Peters  wrote:
>> Current policy: Transportation and lodging only.
>>
>> Proposed policy: Total transportation and lodging minus €200 or 15%
>> (which ever is greater.) The amount to be agreed on before hand
>> between the travel committee and the traveler. Documented on the
>> application form.

What should people who want to apply for Gran Caneria GUADEC do at
this point? Also, it seems like anyone who might ask for help at some
point in the future would be someone who shouldn't sit on the
committee (to avoid accusation of COI).
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: possible GNU licence violation in "Netleverage Thinpoint and/or Universal Desktop" - voilation relates to both rdesktop and CUPS(apple)

[Luis Villa]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:06 AM, buzz  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
>
> If you re not the responsible parties for this in regard to
> rdesktop(matthewm), and CUPS(apple), please forward this to the party yout
> think is responsible for following licence violations up.!
>
> Thanks,
> David B.
>
> The software of concern is the Thinpoint aka AppsPoint aka Netpoint aka
> Universal Desktop aka Desktra software, all of these are by Netleverage.
> Please note, I mention all these software titles as it's very difficult to
> differentiate these products, but I will provide precise details on how I
> come to suspect most or all of these:
>
> The steps I performed to become aware of the possible violation are:
>
> Using a Mac computer, I visited the netleverage site, and clicked the
> 'products' link.
>
> http://www2.netleverage.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=85&Itemid=93
>
> I went to the "universal desktop" section, and selected the "online demo"
> tab.
>
> I followed the instruction there-in to login to the "Thinpoint Desktra
> online demo" with username tptest and password tptest.
>
> After "trust"-ing the java component of the product to run, it gave me a
> remote windows desktop, and an "application launcher" delivered as an X11
> application.
>
> I then reviewed the files that it "installed" to my computer as part of this
> client install, and found them in a folder called ".NativeStart" in my
> homefolder.
>
> One of the files in this folder was a Mach-O bundle i386 file called
> "MacPoint" that is the major cause of concern.When I run this
> application, it states:
>
> ./MacPoint
> NetLeverage AppsPoint Linux Desktop client.
> Based on ThinPoint server, rdesktop client, GTK+2, CUPS and RDP.
>
>
> Performing a "strings" of this binary identified a number of references to
> rdesktop, windowmanagers, and printing , which supports the statement that
> the above application makes.
>
>
> So, in trying to identify the binary, I had to use the titles Universal
> Desktop and Desktra, and the binary itself identified itself as being part
> of AppsPoint and ThinPoint (and Linux, even though I'm on a Mac!), but all
> of these are Netleverage titles, so the entity that appreas to be in
> violation is clear, even if the precise name of the software title is not.
>
> So, I will now give as much info as I have been able to determine regarding
> answering the questions that the GNU URL above lists:
>
> Does the distribution contain a copy of the License?
>
> no, not that I have ben able to determine.
>
> Does it clearly state which software is covered by the License? Does it say
> anything misleading, perhaps giving the impression that something is covered
> by the License when in fact it is not?
>
> no, not that I have ben able to determine.
>
> Is source code included in the distribution?
>
> no, definitely not.
>
> Is a written offer for source code included with a distribution of just
> binaries?
>
> just binaries, and a couple of shell scripts, one of which is called
> xinitrc, and has this string in it: "# $Id: xinitrc,v 1.1.1.1 2005/02/24
> 22:35:39 akosut Exp $"
>
> Is the available source code complete, or is it designed for linking in
> other non-free modules?
>
> no souce code at all, so its clearly incomplete.
>
> If there seems to be a real violation, the next thing you need to do is
> record the details carefully:
>
> the precise name of the product
>
> see above. I think I would refer to this as "MacPoint"?
>
> the name of the person or organization distributing it
>
> NetLeverage Pty Ltd
> Address:
> 17 International Business Centre
> Australian Technology Park, Garden St.
> Eveleigh, NSW, 1430
> Australia
> CEO: Mr Stephen Hasani
> Telephone: (+612) 9209 4446
> Fax: (+612) 9209 4399
>
> email addresses, postal addresses and phone numbers for how to contact the
> distributor(s)
>
> see above.
>
> the exact name of the package whose license is violated
>
> both rdesktop and  CUPS
>
> how the license was violated:
>
> Is the copyright notice of the copyright holder included?
>
> No
>
> Is the source code completely missing?
>
> Yes.
>
> Does the written offer for source, if given, only give a website and/or FTP
> site where to download the source?
>
> No offer given.
>
> Is there a copy of the license included in the distribution?
>
> No.
>
> Is some of the source available, but not all? If so, what parts are missing?
>
> None available.
>
> And finally, I have confirmed that both of these products ( CUPS and
> rdesktop)  are licenced under the GPL, but GTK+2 is not, and thus it's
> licence has not been violated.
>
> rdesktop License : GNU General Public License (GPL)  (
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/rdesktop/ )
>
> extract from CUPS licence info:
> (http://www.cups

possible GNU licence violation in "Netleverage Thinpoint and/or Universal Desktop" - voilation relates to both rdesktop and CUPS(apple)

[buzz]

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

If you re not the responsible parties for this in regard to
rdesktop(matthewm), and CUPS(apple), please forward this to the party yout
think is responsible for following licence violations up.!

Thanks,
David B.

The software of concern is the Thinpoint aka AppsPoint aka Netpoint aka
Universal Desktop aka Desktra software, all of these are by Netleverage.
Please note, I mention all these software titles as it's very difficult to
differentiate these products, but I will provide precise details on how I
come to suspect most or all of these:

The steps I performed to become aware of the possible violation are:

   - Using a Mac computer, I visited the netleverage site, and clicked the
   'products' link.

http://www2.netleverage.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=85&Itemid=93

   - I went to the "universal desktop" section, and selected the "online
   demo" tab.


   - I followed the instruction there-in to login to the "Thinpoint Desktra
   online demo" with username tptest and password tptest.


   - After "trust"-ing the java component of the product to run, it gave me
   a remote windows desktop, and an "application launcher" delivered as an X11
   application.


   - I then reviewed the files that it "installed" to my computer as part of
   this client install, and found them in a folder called ".NativeStart" in my
   homefolder.


   - One of the files in this folder was a Mach-O bundle i386 file called
   "MacPoint" that is the major cause of concern.When I run this
   application, it states:


./MacPoint
NetLeverage AppsPoint Linux Desktop client.
Based on ThinPoint server, rdesktop client, GTK+2, CUPS and RDP.


Performing a "strings" of this binary identified a number of references to
rdesktop, windowmanagers, and printing , which supports the statement that
the above application makes.


So, in trying to identify the binary, I had to use the titles Universal
Desktop and Desktra, and the binary itself identified itself as being part
of AppsPoint and ThinPoint (and Linux, even though I'm on a Mac!), but all
of these are Netleverage titles, so the entity that appreas to be in
violation is clear, even if the precise name of the software title is not.

So, I will now give as much info as I have been able to determine regarding
answering the questions that the GNU URL above lists:

   - Does the distribution contain a copy of the License?

no, not that I have ben able to determine.

   - Does it clearly state which software is covered by the License? Does it
   say anything misleading, perhaps giving the impression that something is
   covered by the License when in fact it is not?

no, not that I have ben able to determine.

   - Is source code included in the distribution?

no, definitely not.

   - Is a written offer for source code included with a distribution of just
   binaries?

just binaries, and a couple of shell scripts, one of which is called
xinitrc, and has this string in it: "# $Id: xinitrc,v 1.1.1.1 2005/02/24
22:35:39 akosut Exp $"

   - Is the available source code complete, or is it designed for linking in
   other non-free modules?

no souce code at all, so its clearly incomplete.

If there seems to be a real violation, the next thing you need to do is
record the details carefully:

   - the precise name of the product

see above. I think I would refer to this as "MacPoint"?

   - the name of the person or organization distributing it

NetLeverage Pty Ltd  Address:   17 International Business Centre
Australian Technology Park, Garden St.  Eveleigh, NSW, 1430  Australia
 CEO:
Mr Stephen Hasani
 Telephone:  (+612) 9209 4446   Fax:  (+612) 9209 4399

   - email addresses, postal addresses and phone numbers for how to contact
   the distributor(s)

see above.

   - the exact name of the package whose license is violated

both rdesktop and  CUPS

   - how the license was violated:
  - Is the copyright notice of the copyright holder included?
   No
   - Is the source code completely missing?
   Yes.
   - Does the written offer for source, if given, *only* give a website
  and/or FTP site where to download the source?
   No offer given.
   - Is there a copy of the license included in the distribution?
   No.
   - Is some of the source available, but not all? If so, what parts are
  missing?
   None available.


And finally, I have confirmed that both of these products ( CUPS and
rdesktop)  are licenced under the GPL, but GTK+2 is not, and thus it's
licence has not been violated.

rdesktop License : GNU General Public License
(GPL)
( http://sourceforge.net/projects/rdesktop/ )

extract from CUPS licence info: (
http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html )
The Comm

Re: GNOME Travel Committee & Travel Policy: A proposal for consideration and feedback

[Dave Neary]

Hi Stormy,

Nice work!

Stormy Peters wrote:
> == Travel Policy Proposal ==
>
> Travel reimbursement policy proposal. Currently, the GNOME Foundation's
> general policy is to reimburse travel and lodging. It has been proposed
> to have the sponsored travelers pay some of the costs. By doing so,
> people would be encouraged to spend money wisely and it would enable us
> to fund more people. Exceptions could always be made on a case by case
> basis (like maybe for students) or on an event basis (like for a
> particular hackfest.)
>
> Current policy: Transportation and lodging only.
>
> Proposed policy: Total transportation and lodging minus €200 or 15%
> (which ever is greater.) The amount to be agreed on before hand between
> the travel committee and the traveler. Documented on the application form.

The principle of a €200 participation when the foundation has been
sollicited seems like a good one to me.

The foundation should have as its goal to be an enabler for as many
people as possible, and making foundation funding a travel subsidy
rather than covering 100% of expenses seems like a good idea for me.

Of course, this is when someone asks the foundation to pay for their
ticket - and nothing prevents the board from waiving some of this and
paying on a need basis, or covering expenses in situations where the
foundation is specifically asking someone to travel (if they're a key
person for a hackfest, or if they're traveling at our behest to speak at
a conference or organise a stand).

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
Dave Neary
GNOME Foundation member
dne...@gnome.org

___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list