On 7/24/05, David Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Luis Villa wrote:
Given that the membership is charged with making important decisions
about the direction of the foundation and the stewardship of the
foundation's resources, I'm fairly skeptical about any move to
increase
On 7/29/05, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Luis Villa a écrit :
The titular membership is only a proxy
for the actual, important membership, since we need one for voting for
the board. I've yet to see any other useful reason to have a
'membership' list.
So the keyu
On 8/9/05, Owen Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 09:17 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote:
Hey,
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 17:14 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote:
Hey,
Budget information is trickling out, and we're engaging in concrete
plans to do things beyond GUADEC. We
On 8/12/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think people will have to tell us what they think needs explaining.
Another one is travel and trade show budgets- I know we sent Tim to
LWE SF in 2004, for example- is that money under conference/trade
shows? travel? This is unclear in the 2004
[For informative purposes of the foundation, I figured I'd answer
these as best as possible for the previous three years.][This would
all have been easier had the data been presented as a .gnumeric file
instead of pdf :)
On 8/12/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* what percentage of our
On 8/12/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/12/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think people will have to tell us what they think needs explaining.
One other question: how did we do at the end of the year, compared to
our predicted budgets for the year? We don't really have
On 9/8/05, Tim Ney, GNOME Foundation [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 09:34 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
a large portion of the attendees were either completely uninterested
in the first two days, or completely uninterested in the 3rd.
The evaluation forms submitted stated did
On 9/8/05, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Tim Ney, GNOME Foundation a écrit :
On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 16:05 +0200, Quim Gil wrote:
For some the GUADEC is an opportunity to meet, for others is a way to
get new contributors, for others is a way to get some money for the
Foundation,
While I'm flaming away elsewhere, I thought it might be constructive
to write down some of the thinking that has led me to the conclusions
that we are drifting very badly with GUADEC right now. A simplistic
SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis might
let me get some of this
Hey, all-
I'm going from 'affiliated with my couch' to taking a technical
lead/consulting/occasional admin position at the Berkman Center for
Internet And Society at Harvard Law School.[1] The position won't
leave me much time for GNOME stuff, but at least enough to continue
fulfilling my duties
On 9/12/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey, all-
I'm going from 'affiliated with my couch' to taking a technical
lead/consulting/occasional admin position at the Berkman Center for
Internet And Society at Harvard Law School.[1] The position won't
leave me much time for GNOME stuff
On 9/15/05, Richard M. Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds like increasing the size of the board by 3 people could
achieve both of the goals that Dave was talking about: to get more
things done, and to have more contested seats **(provided enough people
decide to run so as to make a
On 9/13/05, Tim Ney, GNOME Foundation [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weaknesses: (no particular order)
* reduced spending this year on 'core' expense of getting contributors
to the conference
Some GUADEC costs associated with Stuttgart were lower than
Kristiansand, but not because there were
On 9/29/05, Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] - Yes, its not entirely accurate. Some people on the hypothetical
board-of-seven may not have run for election at all if the board size
was smaller.
You know that's inaccurate, Mark. Everyone who has good friends on the
board knows that
On 10/26/05, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that they don't have enough chances because a lof of members
vote during elections as if it were a popularity contest. And they
probably do this because they don't see what actions the board is
doing or should do, and who would be good
Hadn't realized this was available on the web. Thanks for passing it
along, Dave.
Luis
On 11/8/05, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
http://producingoss.com/html-chunk/index.html
Karl Fogel wrote a book on producing free and open source software,
which discusses everything from
On 11/16/05, Andreas J. Guelzow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-16-11 at 13:14 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Quim Gil wrote:
Gosh, we are not the EU Parliament or the US Congress. Neither have we
28 candidates to choose from. If we keep kicking off candidates for
procedural reasons
Candidacy Questions
[My apologies for answering these so late; I've been on vacation and
away from email since they were posted.]
1) Why are you running for Board of Directors?
Because I care very deeply about the future of GNOME and the future of
Free Software (which I feel are fairly
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
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 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 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 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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 10/31/07, 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 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 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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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
[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 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
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, 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 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
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
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
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
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 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
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
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 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
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 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 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).
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 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
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
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 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
[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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
