Hi Max,
On Tue, 2019-06-04 at 08:42 +0800, Max via foundation-list wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for running for the board.
>
> Thanks everyone who want take times to make GNOME better.
> Just a simple question about Minutes of the board meeting.
>
> Data and information might be different.
>
Hi Philip,
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 18:10 +0100, Philip Withnall wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for running for the board!
>
> What steps do you think the Foundation could take to reduce its
> environmental impact, and the environmental impact of the project as a
> whole?
>
Thanks for raising this
Name: Tristan Van Berkom
E-Mail: t...@gnome.org
Corporate affiliation: Codethink
IRC: tristan
Dear foundation,
I would like to announce my candidacy for the GNOME Foundation board of
directors in this election.
I have been a GNOME contributor for well over 15 years now in the
capacity
On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 11:51 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are a number of GNOME or GNOME-related project fundraisings:
>
> For GIMP:
> https://www.gimp.org/donating/
> https://www.patreon.com/pippin
> http://film.zemarmot.net/en/
>
> PulseAudio:
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 21:15 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
[...]
Further to that, on looking at some of the recent membership data
gathered so far with specific regard to the interns, I have to say, it
does seem like a few interns have been significantly undervaluing
their own contributions by
Changing topic as this thread has branched in many directions (as others
later in this thread pointed out).
On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 15:16 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 13:58 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 09:51:15AM +0100, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Michael Hill mdhil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Tristan Van Berkom t...@gnome.org wrote:
People have common sense, they know that since we are at the zoo,
there actually are monkeys to go see.
Tristan, your analogy should have been
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Sumana Harihareswara
suma...@panix.com wrote:
On 05/10/2013 10:17 AM, Rui Tiago Cação Matos wrote:
Seriously, can everyone relax and not take every little detail so
seriously? I'm all for advertising irc.gnome.org in our websites etc.
But there's really no
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote:
On Sat, 2013-05-11 at 01:27 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
Would you like to join a community where everything you say is
under strict scrutiny ? where you cannot freely express yourself
in your blog without being really
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Hashem Nasarat hnasa...@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/10/2013 12:27 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Sumana Harihareswara
suma...@panix.com wrote:
On 05/10/2013 10:17 AM, Rui Tiago Cação Matos wrote:
Seriously, can everyone relax
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:21 AM, James purplei...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote:
On Fri, April 26, 2013 4:51 am, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
I'd love to visit Portland!
However we might want to take into account that doing it in the west
coast
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Dave Neary dne...@free.fr wrote:
Hi,
According to the calendar, with the upcoming 3.8 release, we will soon be in
feature proposal again.
For what it's worth, Feature Proposals in the open doesn't really work as
a concept.
GNOME is comprised of hundreds of
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
2012/10/15 Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net:
On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 15:45 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote:
I see many people have expressed their consensus in this, thus I'll
defer the decision to the Board. Thanks to anyone sending a
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
2012/10/15 Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com:
hi;
On 15 October 2012 11:32, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
2012/10/15 Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com:
have we had any indication that being on irc.gnome.org is in any way,
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
2012/10/15 Tristan Van Berkom t...@gnome.org:
Again, how do you expect to achieve this hypothetical migration ?
You will post a memo and people will just happily follow the
foundation's decree ?
I think you've misunderstood
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Sebastian Keller sebastian-kel...@gmx.de
wrote:
I have seen people on #gnome on freenode asking for the official
channels of gnome components, but those were very very few and
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 14:25 -0400, Liam R E Quin wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 09:21 -0400, Allan Day wrote:
It would be great to be able to run something like Bip [1] for GNOME IRC.
Note, it's of course NOT OK to publish
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Baptiste Mille-Mathias
baptiste.millemath...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've seen the foundation will organize a contest to design a tee-shirt
for the GNOME 3 release [1], and while reading the terms of the rules
[2], I found the first part of paragraph 4
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
[...]
I'm surprised that a suggestion that a specific site be singled out by GNOME
for extra-special treatment, including warning messages, based on what
amounts to unsourced gossip, is being treated with even a moment's
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 12:13 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org
wrote:
I (fully) agree with John here.
The lawyer-talk proposal of Jason
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
[...]
We are trying to fix a non-existing problem.
I dont know about the rest of you but for me this is a
touchy emotional subject, its really painful, and we all
did go through it before, it died with this Code of
2009/5/30 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
So my freedom of speech comment was not well written.
I do think anyone has the right to say what they want, but if they want to
be heard they have to think about their tone. (I was trying to explain why
someone might want to moderate their
2009/5/29 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com:
So I'm hearing Dave say we need more policing and Philip saying everything
is ok. What do others think?
Well, if anyone wants some perspective, its not like we havent been
through all this before:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 5:13 PM, Hubert Figuiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Seriously, that even more reason for hoping the relicensing of
libgladeui as LGPL does not happen. Basically, what you are proposing,
is that Glade be licensed in a way that it would favor fragmenting GNOME
while
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:37 AM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linus decided that Bitkeeper was fine for his needs, and started using
it and publishing his repository in a public Bitkeeper repository.
Bitkeeper guy (Larry McVoy) gave free copies of the client to free
software developers.
(apperently my other email just now missed the list due to mailing from my
ordinary email address, here it is...)
Hi Guys,
Theres obviously been some scrutiny concerning our decision to finally
relicense Glade or primarily, libgladeui - so I will try to do my best
to address your concerns and
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Richard M. Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do you want to relicense Glade under the GNU Lesser GPL?
The current license, the GNU GPL, seems more appropriate since
it prevents the release of non-free extensions of Glade.
Hi,
Basically, the glade core
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Richard M. Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
As free software developers we naturally feel good to see our own
programs in wider use. But what is really important is for free
software to replace proprietary software. We can achieve more for
freedom if
Hi,
We've been talking about relicensing Glade 3 under LGPL for
a few years now (other primary contributors and myself), and I'm
about to try and bite the bullet and take the plunge.
I have a vague idea about what things must be done and steps that must be
taken for this to happen, i.e.
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
You need to:
1. Make a list of each author of Glade
2. Contact each of them, requesting permission to relicence Glade
3a. When all of them have sent you a written note (email is OK) then you
can go ahead.
3b. If you
On Nov 8, 2007 12:07 PM, Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Posting 'a beer at
next Guadec for whoever fixes bug #7' is informal enough that I think
we avoid the main issue which is the alienation of volunteers,
however, it doesn't really address the big issue which is how
On Nov 6, 2007 7:26 PM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/6/07, Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess it's no surprise that money and free/open software have a
delicate relationship...
I have been putting it in this way:
The connection between free software
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 17:56 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
[...]
Planet GNOME without a strong editorial control would probably suck.
Just like maintainers vouch and check patches in each of their modules,
we need to have some control on blogs getting added to planet. And
that's Jeff's module...
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 21:45 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
[...]
In either of the cases above, we have to make Gnome so good, so
compelling, that people wouldn't want to use anything else. In the
first case they would say, not powered by Gnome? I'm not using it,
then. In the second
On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 01:35 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Hubert Figuiere
That said if there is any proposal for Canada (Montreal is IMHO a better
choice than Ottawa), count me in :-)
Where necessary, and in this case I think it is, we should be very clear
about GNOME's
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 12:18 -0600, Shaun McCance wrote:
I saved logs of both the meetings.
http://www.gnome.org/~shaunm/070227-soc.txt
http://www.gnome.org/~shaunm/070306-soc.txt
Embarrassing as it sounds, I have to admit that when I volunteered
to be on the selection committee I was under
Joachim Noreiko wrote:
for the advance of computer users' freedom.
What freedoms exactly?
The computer users I know can't code. What are they
going to with the source code they have the freedom to
modify?
And free as in beer makes no difference to them: they
either got their Windows XP
Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
On Thu, 2006-03-08 at 00:22 +0100, Bill Haneman wrote:
I think the second term in your Princeton Wordnet citation is the one we
are aiming for: e.g. principles.
One can have principles without rules.
Principles are rules. Check Worldnet for principle if you
I think one of the things I like most about GNOME, is its anarchistic
democratic nature, this is a true example of how people get along
in real life, if alot of good-natured people with productive intents
gather together and form a society, GNOME is an example of how things
would work out.
Richard Stallman wrote:
So I would definitely agree that given an idea of contributing (code),
women will easily ask who will pay for it where men might not. Maybe
they consider open source more as working than as a hobby or a way
social networking or even as a way to educate
Andrew Sobala wrote:
[...]
Is it? What are we actually talking about?
The original referenced e-mail
(http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2005-November/msg00177.html)
is a technical opinion on how to make open standards as useful as
possible in providing
41 matches
Mail list logo
