Re: Advisory Board changes?
2008/9/8 Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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 seem to be anything to prevent that[1] and since the board has no decision making authority I don't know if it matters much that they do. I also don't know if the OpenedHand entity is going to vanish due to the deal. But, just to be clear, could we get some sort of statement about this either from the Board of Directories or from the companies involved? We haven't formally discussed it yet. I assume that getting this straight is one of the last things on the minds of the Intel/OH guys and the board has no reason to rush them :) Obviously we want to continue to deepen our relationship both with the OH team and with other parts of Intel as well, so we'll work with them to make sure we get it right. Yes, absolutely. In practice, it is worth noting that the exact nature of advisory board seats are extremely flexible. For example, we often invite advisory board members to bring technical advisors to calls. So I'd expect that while there will formally be one less seat at the table we'll frequently have representatives from both 'old' Intel and the OH crew, depending on what is appropriate for the topic at hand. Yeah, it was mainly the formal side of things I was wondering about. Hope that answers the question- It sure does, thanks to you and Dave for the answers! -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GTK and Adobe Flash
2008/5/20 Hubert Figuiere [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Worse. Whatever is the state of the Free Software implementation, using Flash is bad for Free Software, because Flash is not an open standard, is a poorly documented format, and leverage non-royalty free technologies like MP3, Sorenson Sparks, ON2 VP6, partial support of MPEG4, etc. So whatever version of Flash it is, it is not good for Free Software, on an advocating point of view. For what it's worth (not much in this context I guess), the Open Screen Project seems like a step in the right direction: http://www.adobe.com/openscreenproject/faq/ Not an open standard, but at least you now have permission to read the specs and implement a player with the knowledge. Given that Flash is a technology that won't vanish overnight even if all open source developers would hope for it really hard tonight before going to bed, any help on implementing an open source solution to access that content is probably a good thing, even if the formats aren't. -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: reusing / copy of the gnome logo
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 kind of mobile ringtone/whatever site. Didn't see the logo there either though. Igloo.info seems to be just some service provider default page? -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: GNOME dependent on Mono
2007/11/30, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The more cool stuff depends on Mono, the closer we get to a situation where a Microsoft attack on Mono would put GNOME in a vice. If these programs are important enough to deserve the term miss out on, then I think they should be written in another language. Yeah, also all those uglier-than-lawful Perl programs! Here's my request: Please don't write cool stuff in Perl since I want to run them with Python Thanks a bunch for complying. Makes me feel all free to choose and stuff. P.S. In my opinion, freedom should not limit even the bad choices people make -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?)
2007/9/8, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 04:47:31PM +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote: 2007/9/8, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 05:56:38AM -0400, Kevin Kubasik wrote: Let's summarize it as: I don't know any D-SCM :-) (only investigate by checking out docs) (but I am also not interested in learning a SCM) Hopefully that doesn't translate I don't know and I don't care... It translates to: I really care about not needing to learn an SCM. Ok, so discussion on the benefits of Git (or others) over SVN seem a bit pointless from this standpoint. Take for example the output of 'git' push Update remote refs along with associated objects That to me is a 'wtf?' (1.5.2). At least it has text, unlike SVN ;) [snip] I didn't have to learn SVN. You must be a quick learner then. I remember having to refer to the SVN book loads of times before I could use SVN for merging and so on. And this all is naturally from the developer/maintainer POV, as translators and documentors do not benefit from this as much. But as the general opinion seems to be, they shouldn't be forced to use SCM:s directly anyway. That is a theoretical discussion. Ideally GNOME has a D-SCM now and all translators use a websystem that automatically translators. It doesn't exist. Of course it is theoretical since there's no hope (nor sense) in switching over to anything before there are tools. As is pointed out, it would make things worse for non-developres. But that doesn't mean the discussion needs to be punted indefinetly, and statements like I don't want to learn a new SCM are really not contributing to a discussion of the benefits a new tool would give to developers. At least I thought we were discussing exactly that. Although there is now some progress towards D-SCM, I don't see such a websystem happening. Also am not sure if a websystem is the most appropriate way. I'd much rather see something like SCM support for gtranslate which would give a comfortable tool to translate and send changes to the server. -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?)
2007/9/8, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 05:56:38AM -0400, Kevin Kubasik wrote: Let's summarize it as: I don't know any D-SCM :-) (only investigate by checking out docs) (but I am also not interested in learning a SCM) Hopefully that doesn't translate I don't know and I don't care... For me, I consider the you don't change directories for each branch you make a drawback. I find directories as branches easier to understand (I hated this in CVS). There's some tools to visualize the branch history in git, which includes more information than just this is a branch. mkdir projdir cd projdir git clone ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/git/coolproject/kkubasik git branch newcoolfeature git checkout newcoolfeature I don't like this checkout step. You can merge it with the branch command if you like: git checkout -b newcoolfeature write an awesome feature git commit -a Is the confusing way removed? If I do git-TAB I see 'Display all 144 possibilities'. Why so many? Because that's how git is structured. It's a collection of little tools to do specific tasks. You'll likely use 4-5 of them in normal developer tasks. Also, invoking 'git' gives you the most common ones. If you do svnTAB there's only one useful command out of 9 (on my machine) and it doesn't tell what it does either just by looking at the name. Does that really mean anything? And furthermore, looking at git commands is absolutely the worst way to start learning git. Specially when coming from SVN, git commands as they are will make no sense at all. But, when you read up and look at few pretty pictures about how git works (like in http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/ ), they start to make sense and you'll see how they turn SCM from just storing snapshots of file states to actual tool for managing a project and it's changes. And this all is naturally from the developer/maintainer POV, as translators and documentors do not benefit from this as much. But as the general opinion seems to be, they shouldn't be forced to use SCM:s directly anyway. Easy stuff should be easy, hard stuff should be harder (otherwise the easy stuff is confusing). I never liked CVS, but I like SVN.. easy to understand. There was great commotion about people not wanting to switch to svn because they had to learn new SCM. I bet nobody today wants to go back to CVS though, and it is bound to be the same for the next step too... Anyway, I think you forgot the 'push'. Now you have 2 branches (the original, and newcoolfeature) where new cool feature has your changes. Is it easy enough if you want to avoid branches? I usually work on trunk, nothing else (I do understand people want better merging than available in SVN). Even more pleasant as you own the cloned repo and nothing happens on the central server until you really want it to. But I guess that's for the newbie-committee to decide if there ever will be one... -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Proposal: Shift election cycle back six months
2007/8/7, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Jeff Waugh wrote: So here's the proposal: I'd like to suggest we shift the election cycle back six months, landing the process in May and June [1]. More controversially, I reckon the best way to achieve this without a lot of pain would be to extend the current Board's term by six months. Fully support this - I have no problem with the current board holding on for another 6 months. Agree. Doubly so for the importance of a face-to-face meeting. Having been a part of running some organisations in the past I know that doing so well depends highly on your motivation. And nothing can be more motivating than meeting up in a joyful and energising community gathering like GUADEC, right?. -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Addition to Code of Conduct (Was: Re: Integer pixel operations for gtk+?)
2007/2/12, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Le samedi 10 février 2007, à 14:29, Koen Kooi a écrit : There was some talk on the cairo list about moving image stuff into cairo and having optimized implementations there. It would be a nice experiment since the cairo developers are a lot more open to suggestions and contributions than the gtk+ people. This last sentence is unproductive and doesn't help. Please take a few minutes and look at http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Nice to see the CoC finally at real work ;) What I realized it was lacking though, was something that would have fitted here perfectly. That is, a note that while lots of people get money from working around Gtk+ or GNOME projects in general, very few (if any?) are actually paid for to fulfill community requests in the form of patches or feature requests or even fixing bugs. Thus their motivation to do so can vary a lot, depending on the issue at hand. That's why it's not really nice to go on DEMANDING for action and accusing some undefined group of people (in this case gtk devs and gtk+ people) of being lazy and unfriendly. Furthermore, in OSS the responsiveness can be pretty much determined by the amount of input from the requester: - enhancement idea (slow response, if at all) - patch (moderate response, if a clear need) - patch with a test case (good response) - patch with a test case and a rationale for the feature (usually replied to with committed, thanks) This is something that people usually don't take into account when they feel bad about their patches being ignored and it would be nice to have a reminder of that in the Code. I don't know how to compress that into a more to-the-point version though, but maybe someone else has an idea? P.S. Sorry but the abbreviation is just too hilarious not to make fun with... :P -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code of Conduct final draft?
2006/8/1, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm fairly happy with the Code Of Conduct draft now: http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct I can certainly agree with all of this but where is the one thing I feel the GNOME community excels in? That is, saying THANK YOU! It is seen loudly, clearly and often in blogs and bugzilla and everywhere so I think it definetly needs to be in the Code of Conduct too. Or am I just too finnish to see this as normal behaviour?-) -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code Of Conduct
2006/5/31, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quim wrote: (To me this is a small tiny proof that the only really operative CoC is that one assumed internally in our own personal values, attitude and behavior) [snip] I wouldn't feel optimistic about a code of conduct that didn't represent our current consensus. We have a few rules here and there in GNOME (see the release process, for instance). They grew gradually out of consensus - that's why we very rarely need to enforce them. But just because something is already agreed, it doesn't mean it's not useful to state it and advertise it. It reinforces what we already have, and gives us more of it. So, yes, a little rhetoric is good sometimes. The objections I see so far to this are - It wouldn't change anything or - It's not necessary. You forgot my It has the potential to bring tedious discussions on interpetations (which, amusingly, this thread is beginning to feel like :) The page currently looks like a general remember to be nice to people-reminder, which probably won't have that much controversy though. -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code Of Conduct
2006/5/30, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Women are not less idealistic or more calculating than men (contrary to one comment I saw that perhaps women were more practical, and wanted to get paid for their work. So we're doing something wrong. My wife did tend to roll her eyes and shake her head when she wondered if I got paid for typing away in the evenings (and the answer was no, it's just for fun). But after she realized that it all actually supported my worklife quite well, she didn't consider it as stupid at all. 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 oneself. These are IMO points that are often not emphasized in the OSS marketing. Instead of come and contribute it should read come and learn. I bet most people would respond better to message of here you can get something instead of here you can give something, right?-) For me OSS is as much about social networking and learning new things as it is about sharing and coding cool stuff. -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code Of Conduct
2006/5/30, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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 should suffice', not 'we care.' Additionally, this feels like a solution looking for a problem- have we ever had significant problems stopping aggressive or rude behavior? We haven't had any of it on any of the primary mailing lists since crazy orb-boy that I can remember, and that was dealt with fairly promptly. I thought the main deterrent was arrogant and dictator-like developers who pat each other in the back and ignore the requests of users. Adding more rules seems pointless there ;) Seriosly, while a code of conduct is a good thing to follow, having it written down somewhere immediately means enforcing it (officially) too. Which means it will be hacked to pieces with interpetations of it (was this a minor incident or was it a grave mistake? But the other guy said this and that). Which means there will be a need to define the correct interpetation of the code... ...which will mean assigning a commitee to evaluate the definitions and ... Ok, maybe I'm being somewhat pessimistic about this. But then again, isn't the HIG read as a law and questioned in terms of interpetations way too often, while its purpose is only to remind and suggest known good behaviour? -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: [Off Topic] We need Vendors? [was Words to Avoid Vendor]
2005/12/2, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, Murray Cumming wrote: I think it's a bit silly, but the difference is that RMS would be incapable of saying I welcome 3rd party [proprietary] developers building software on the platform. Let me read back a bit... RMS said: We want to encourage non-free apps to use GNOME, but we don't want to appear to grant those non-free apps ethical legitimacy. We have to choose our words with care to achieve both goals at once. He seemed pretty capable yesterday... I think he meant that he welcomes the fact that they use or start using GNOME (making the software one step more free), not the fact that they develope more non-free apps using GNOME. Which was Murray's point AFAICT. /me, exiting to the back left from this discussion he has no intention to be part of -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
