Re: Changes in Membership Committee

2010-03-23 Thread Lucas Rocha
Thanks for the great work Bruno!


2010/3/23 Bruno Boaventura

 It was a pleasure for me hold the chairman position of Membership
 Committee in the last two years.
 Recently we had a meeting to resolve some issues. One of these things
 were to elect another chairman to the committee.
 I'm in the committee yet, but the chairman now is Andrea Veri.

 The new Membership Committee is:

 Bruno Boaventura (that's me!!!)
 Tobias Mueller
 Susana Pereira
 Pedro Villavicencio
 Andrea Veri (chairman)

 If you want to know better the Committee, please visit our wiki page [1].

 At your service,

 Bruno Boaventura
 GNOME Foundation Membership Committee

 foundation-list mailing list

foundation-list mailing list

Resigning from the Board

2010-02-17 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

I've been thinking a lot about what to do about my participation on
GNOME Foundation's Board of Directors in face of the fact that my wife
and I are expecting our first baby in February. After careful
consideration, I decided to resign. I want to be fully focused on my
family (especially in the first few months) without feeling bad for
doing Board stuff while I could be with my family or not doing Board
stuff while I'm spending time with my family.

So, considering my priorities now, I feel that I would be more useful
to the Board by stepping down and letting another person with a lot of
energy to take my position on Board for the rest of this mandate. The
Board has decided to appoint Jorge Castro to replace me. He's highly
motivated and I'm sure he'll give good contributions as a member of
the Board.

I've had a great time in my two and a half years on Foundation Board.
It was a great way to support the community in several ways and to
work with some very nice people. The GNOME Foundation is getting
better everyday and I feel very proud to be part of it.


foundation-list mailing list

Code of Conduct and Foundation membership (Summary)

2009-12-14 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

It's quite obvious that the original thread ended up branching into
several separate topics. I thought it would be useful to summarize
some of the key points on each topic in an attempt to bring a more
practical perspective to the whole discussion.

This is not an official message from the Board. It's just me trying to
make some sense out of the tons of messages in the thread and, maybe,
bring a more useful (or at least more clear) closure to the
discussed topics.

-- The original topic: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

The message I sent to start discussion was quite specific: we, the
board, wanted to know the opinion of the community on having the Code
of Conduct[1] as an official document that current/new Foundation
members would have to agree with in order to gain membership. It was
strange to see that several people framed the discussion in the
context of Planet GNOME only. Actually, the intention was to have a
broader discussion on how useful it would be to have CoC as an
official guideline for members, independently on where/how they are
communicating (planet, mailing lists, irc, etc) with the community.
Here's what I could summarize in terms of most interesting points:

- Effectiveness: some questioned the actual effectiveness of having an
official CoC in dealing with conflict situations. A point was made
that more rules doesn't necessarily result in a healthier community.
- Enforcement mechanism: some people think it wouldn't make sense
require all Foundation members to sign the CoC if there's no clear
enforcement mechanism.
- Who enforces the CoC: opinions are a bit mixed regarding who would
be responsible for enforcing CoC. Some people think the Board should
do it. Others are absolutely against this idea.

My impression is that the topic has not been discussed properly. The
discussion deviated to parallel (indirectly related) topics. Maybe
it's because it's a very tricky topic (quite hard to reach consensus).
Or perhaps we haven't come up with a good enough solution yet. Maybe
that's something the Board should discuss a bit further and come up
with a more concrete proposal for discussion. Another possibility is
to have a focused group of Foundation members and Board members
interested in the topic to work on a proposal. Opinions?

-- Code of Conduct suggestions

At some point the thread shifted more specifically towards Code of
Conduct itself. Behdad made a suggestion to add two more points to

- Learn to agree to disagree.
- Criticize ideas, not people presenting them.

Pierre suggested that both items are added to the list of example
behaviours under Be respectful and considerate. This is something
that should be officially proposed for general consideration. Behdad,
maybe you could do that? :-)

-- Planet GNOME suggestions

And then the discussion moved to Planet GNOME. I could find some
concrete suggestions to improve Planet GNOME in different ways:

- Rating system on posts Planet. It would be some sort of Digg-like
Planet. Readers would be able to rate posts down or up. Posts with
general positive rating would be appear up on the page. Some people
raised concerns that readers using feed reads would not be able to
quickly rate posts.
- Annual reminder asking people if they still want to be aggregated on
Planet. This would allow editors to remove blogs from people not
willing to be on Planet anymore.

Those are topics that editors (me, Vincent and Jeff) will definitely
be discussing soon. I'm personally in favor of the annual reminder
idea. Not sure about the rating system. Hope to have news about those
ideas soon.

-- GNOME as part of GNU

In response to Stallman's statement that Planet GNOME should not
aggregate content about non-free software (because GNOME is part of
GNU), Philip informally proposed a vote to decide on GNOME's
membership to the GNU project. The idea of the vote have some support.
Concerns were raised about the negative impact that such vote could
cause in the community.

It seems to me that this topic deserves a more careful discussion
before moving forward in any new direction. This is not the kind of
topic that should be decided on in the middle of a long thread that
was supposed to be discussing something totally different. Especially
considering that there is no official call from FSF or GNU maintainers
to remove GNOME as part of GNU project. So, there's no hurry really.
Also, someone would have to officially propose the vote to members,
which hasn't actually happened. It would be useful to know how
generally interested the Foundation members are in this topic.

That's all I guess. Feel free to add stuff I missed in this quick summary.



foundation-list mailing list

Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-11-25 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

The Board has recently received some complaints from members of the
community about certain the inappropriate behaviors. In the context of
GNOME Foundation, it's really hard to argue about how we expect our
members to behave if there is no official guidelines that members are
supposed to comply with. The GNOME Code of Conduct[1] has been serving
very well as an informal guideline for the community but we'd like to
make it an official document that new Foundation members are expected
to explicitly agree[2] with before being accepted. This way we'll have a
common ground for dealing with certain conflict situations and avoid
trying to base our discussions on guidelines that certain members
haven't explicitly agreed on.

Before deciding on this, we thought it would be useful to get some
feedback from the community.


on behalf of the GNOME Foundation Board of Directors

foundation-list mailing list

Re: Meeting Minutes Published - October 29, 2009

2009-11-25 Thread Lucas Rocha

2009/11/24 Vincent Untz
 Le mardi 24 novembre 2009, à 23:53 +0100, Andy Wingo a écrit :
 Hi Brian,

 Thanks for the detailed and readable notes!

 On Fri 13 Nov 2009 22:27, Brian Cameron writes:

  Minutes for Meeting of October 29th, 2009
        More generally, we need to make sure that GNOME Foundation members
        sign the GNOME Code of Conduct, and perhaps make it a requirement
        for new members to sign. Also need to update the GNOME blog and
        planet so that it is more clear that people should follow the
        GNOME Code of Conduct.

 A couple of thoughts:

 First, the planet has always been under editorial control; it has a
 maintainer, like any other module -- actually a few of them.

 Therefore, what is or is not on the planet may fairly be seen to be
 under the purview of the maintainer(s), who are there due to their
 respected position in the field of their module, in this case in the
 public discourse of GNOME. So they can promote or censure certain
 kinds of speech as they see fit.

 Yep. And it is expected by the current editors that blog posts that
 appear on Planet GNOME respect the Code of Conduct :-) It's mentioned in
 the guidelines for Planet GNOME in the wiki, but it's not mentioned in
 the current footer.

 Secondly, binding or pseudo-binding resolutions on the Foundation
 membership should probably be ratified by the Foundation membership
 itself via some more formal process. As it is I don't think a majority
 have signed the CoC. (FWIW, I have.)

 Nod. Actually, I think there was an action item about starting a
 discussion here on this topic... I guess the mail is in the draft folder
 somewhere, it should hopefully arrive soon ;-)

I've just created a new thread for the official discussion on this
topic. Please, continue there.

foundation-list mailing list

Re: GNOME leadership [was Re: So what do people *except* me want from the foundation?]

2009-06-08 Thread Lucas Rocha

2009/6/8 Luis Villa
 2009/6/5 Luis Villa
 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, to help other leaders emerge and get the support 
 they need to do their work?' I have no easy answers to either of these, 

 Or to put it more bluntly, now that I think of it: why don't we have a
 BDFL? Why have we chewed up and spit out all the potential candidates
 for the title?

Another important question is: leader of what? BDFL of what? I
honestly don't see how only one leader could alone set the direction
for desktop, platform, mobile, web, marketing, release management,
etc. We're just too big today. I've commented before[1] that we should
definitely consider having more clear/official leadership on specific
domains of the project.


foundation-list mailing list

Re: What do you think of the foundation?

2009-06-02 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi Dave,

2009/6/2 Dave Neary

 john palmieri wrote:

 I'm of the same mind here.  There are a number of people who I don't like
 to read on blogs and whatnot but I would rather us as a community figure out
 productive ways of dealing with it as opposed to lording our own views over
 those who don't have as much pull in the community.  Red tape and draconian
 censorship measures is not the way to handle the issue.  If our blogs and
 mailing lists are no longer exciting and informative then there is something
 more fundamentally wrong than who we give a voice to.

 Who talked about red tape and draconian censorship?

 I commend Philip for succeeding in framing this debate around the
 punishments rather than around the reasons why they might happen.

 Let me be as clear as possible:

 There are people in our community who are losing faith in the community's
 ability to have reasoned technical debate and design discussions because of
 vacuous 100 mail threads, and IRC being dominated by half a dozen people
 whose principal contribution to GNOME is to be on IRC all the time. Others
 are being driven away from the community for our tolerance of he who shouts
 loudest politics, flame wars and provocative and offensive blog posts.

 I believe that these people should have a group that they can turn to, argue
 their points, and ask for that group to do something about it. I believe
 that the task is the role of the foundation, and the board is well placed to
 assume that role now.

 When I say do something about it, that may be simply to point out to the
 people involved that they're not being productive. It may be to publicly
 shame people for antisocial behaviour. It may be to tell the complainer that
 they're making a big deal about nothing. But right now if you are being
 driven away from GNOME forums or from the GNOME project in general, you have
 no-where to turn. How is that red tape? How is it draconian censorship?

IMO, there's a big difference between counterproductive behavior and
disrespectful behavior. People can be very counterproductive without
being disrespectful (moving focus of discussion to irrelevant
technical details, being against a proposal for personal reasons,

For example, I agree with Olav that d-d-l became too noisy and
counterproductive too many times lately. And I guess some highly
relevant contributors didn't participate on certain discussions simply
because the discussion was too noisy (dozens of messages from people
just giving random opinions) and lacking focus (someone picking on
something irrelevant, etc). In general, people are not being
disrespectful IMO. This kind of problem can be solved with stronger
moderation and well-defined guidelines on mailing lists (which I guess
depends on the type of discussion, dunno) which is just not happening
on d-d-l for instance.

IMO, disrespectful behavior includes being sarcastic or ironic, making
personal accusations in public, making pejorative comments about a
proposal instead of disagreeing with counter-arguments, etc. I see
this kind of behavior sometimes on our mailing lists but they are
exceptions, not the common behavior.

Maybe what I'm trying to say is: I think we're being counterproductive
too often, not necessarily disrespectful. And yes, this is a problem
that needs a solution. My opinion is that we just need stronger and
consistent moderation depending on the context.

Some examples (a bit stretched for clarity)

Example 1:
- Person A proposes a new module for GNOME 3.2 on d-d-l
- Person B replies with This module is crap, ridiculous
- Release team members (who are responsible for organizing the module
propositions) reply (in private?) to Person B with Please, try to
keep discussion productive with actual arguments for/against the

Example 2:
- Person A proposes a new i18n guideline on gnome-i18n mailing list
- Person B replies with You proposal is total shit
- GNOME i18n coordinators (who are responsible for the team
coordination) reply (in private?) to Person B with Please, try to
keep discussion productive with actual arguments for/against the i18n


foundation-list mailing list

New Affiliation

2008-04-23 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

As you probably know, I left Nokia in the end of March. I now work for
LiTL (, a startup company developing a consumer product
that involves hardware, software, and online services.

I'm the only Board member affiliated to this company so no issues here.


foundation-list mailing list

GNOME @ Google Summer of Code 2008

2008-03-04 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

As you probably know, Google is organizing one more edition of their
Summer of Code (GSoC) program. More information about the program can
be found here:

GNOME has participated in all GSoC editions as a mentoring
organization with some nice results in terms of contributions and new
contributors. So, we want to participate this year too!

Our first organization kickoff meeting will happen on March 6 at 18h
UTC in the #soc-admin channel ( We're looking for
volunteers to help us to organize GNOME's participation in GSoC 2008.
So, if you want to help in any way, join us!


foundation-list mailing list

GNOME Outreach Program: Accessibility - List of tasks published!

2008-03-01 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

For those interested in participating in the GNOME Outreach Program:
Accessibility, you probably want to have a look at the list of tasks
that has just been published in the program's website:

So, now what? Read the program rules very carefully and claim one of
the available tasks. Proposals acceptance is open now!

foundation-list mailing list

GNOME Foundation Meeting Minutes :: 2nd January 2008

2008-01-17 Thread Lucas Rocha
GNOME Foundation Meeting Minutes :: 2nd January 2008

Members of current board and previous attending.


* Behdad Esfahbod
* Anne Oestergard
* John Palmieri
* Vincent Untz
* Jeff Waugh
* Brian Cameron
* Lucas Rocha


* Quim Gil
* Glynn Foster


* Luis Villa


1) Conference Calls

The new Board needs to find a way to proceed with the conference calls
for the meetings. So far, Sun has been provinding the infrastructure.

ACTION: Brian to check with Sun about conference calls infra for
Board meetings

2) Summer Event in Peru

Diego Escalante requested sponsorship from GNOME Foundation to bring
latin american GNOME contributors to a summer FLOSS event in Peru. The
Board has aproved a $3000,00 sponsor for this event. Diego is also
discussing with GNOME Chile about a Latin American tour of some key
GNOME contributors from Europe and/or US. A request related to that
will come as soon as they have more concrete information.

ACTION: Vincent to send a confirmation to Diego about this
sponsorship request

3) Sysadmin Hiring

Vincent sent a message to sysadmins asking their opinion before going
on with the hiring process. Jeff thinks that, because of lack of
structure and leadership in the sysadmin group, it's really hard to
get a collective opinion from them, only individual opinions. For
Jeff, we should guess the best we can and go ahead and start the
hiring process. Vincent suggested to wait some more time before going

4) Annual Report 2007

Lucas said the design work starts on January 15th. The content is
mostly done. The idea is to release the Annual Report in the beginning
of February. The printing service to be used is still undefined. Anne
suggested asking Advisory Board members about potential printing
services. Jeff suggested asking Andreas Nilsson about local printing
services in Sweden (as they might be cheaper than in Australia).

ACTION: Lucas to ask Andreas Nilsson about printing services in Sweden
ACTION: Lucas to send a message to AB members about printing services

5) GTK+ Hackfest

Behdad said everything is going fine. He should follow up with Mathias
Hasselmann to find and book the venue.

6) Planet GNOME Maintainership

Jeff talked with Lucas and Vincent about co-maintaining Planet GNOME.
The guidelines are being worked out by Jeff. Andreas and Tuomas worked
on the guidelines for the hackergotchis, which is good.


FOSDEM is in good hands. Some people from GNOME-NL are taking care of
the GNOME booth. A call for talks is about to be sent by Christophe

ACTION: Vincent to check with KDE guys about meeting them at FOSDEM to talk
 about joint activities

8) Bostom Summit 2008

Jeff said is good time to make the booking of the venue. The expected
date is Columbus Day holiday's weekend.

ACTION: John to talk with Jonathan and Zana about the Summit venue booking

9) GUADEC 2008

GUADEC dates were officially announced. Lucas said it would be nice to
have a press release for GUADEC in Istambul.

There is a proposal to use a proprietary system for handling GUADEC
2008 registrations and billing. John said he only feels it's ok if we
publish a major plan to use free software in the future editions of
the conference. It seems that None of the current FLOSS systems help
on the billing part. Jeff said there's no option for FLOSS systems for
what we want. In his opinion, the current Drupal at is
badly deployed which makes things more complicated. Jeff suggests to
host the website in a GNOME's Wordpress MU and make it the
conference web frontend. The payment and agenda systems would be
separate from the CMS. John thinks any solution we choose now should
be reusable for next editions. The final decision is up to GUADEC

On the GUADEC financial management side, Anne suggests to take all
payments to GNOME Foundation's office in Boston and then transfer to
the GUADEC organizers as they need. Anne suggests to ask Zana to
contact our Bank to know our options.

ACTION: John to contact Zana about financial handling between
GNOME Foundation
 and GUADEC organizers
ACTION: John to ask Baris about their timeline around the website,
registration, and
 billing systems
ACTION: Behdad to work on the initial version of the GUADEC press release
ACTION: Lucas to suggest Baris to prepare some flyers to promote GUADEC
 in Istambul

10) Membership Committee situation

According to Lucas, the MC is not in a good situation. For some
reason, the new volunteers are not processing the membership
applications and handling daily requests.

ACTION: Lucas to check with new volunteers if they need any help
ACTION: Jeff to make sure the new MC volunteers have their
accounts, in case
 this is blocking their work

11) Thanks to parting directors

This was the last meeting with the 2007 board. Big thanks for the

Re: two questions for candidates

2007-11-26 Thread Lucas Rocha

2007/11/26, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 1. Would you change anything in the GNOME Foundation statement about

I would change the date it was released. :-) I think the most serious
problem about GNOME Foundation participation on ECMA TC45-M was that
it wasn't properly explained and clarified to the community at the
time it started. The statement came after a lot of noise.

About the content, no, I wouldn't change the core message. Anyway,
I've already given my opinion about OOXML on the previous set of

 2. How do you think the GNOME Foundation should support the Free
 Software Movement in general?

- By supporting the GNOME community on bringing outstanding user
experience 100% based on Free Software
- By promoting the GNOME Project around the world so that
universities, NGO's, governments, social movements, private companies,
and other organizations know that they can perform their daily tasks
with Free Software
- By promoting the GNOME Project around the world so that we can bring
more contributors to our (and other) communities

foundation-list mailing list

Re: A question to candidates

2007-11-23 Thread Lucas Rocha

2007/11/23, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Le vendredi 23 novembre 2007, à 14:42 +0100, Murray Cumming a écrit :
  On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 01:18 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
   Taking too much time to decide: it sometimes happen that we wait for a
   meeting or for another event to take a decision, while the decision is
   pretty trivial. It might be related to my first item, since pinging
   people so they say +1/-1 could be enough.
  This is generally caused by the habit of only making decisions in
  meetings, instead of making decisions on the mailing list. And a
  tendency to think that all decisions must be unanimous.
  It works like this. Something is discussed. It becomes an unstructured
  debate and the meeting runs out of time. Someone says Well, let's make
  a decision at the next meeting. But everyone knows that nothing will be
  done in the meantime to make that more likely, and half the meetings are
  postponed (or don't have the relevant people attending).

 As Jeff mentioned, this year, we had quite a lot of decisions on the
 mailing list. But while it could have been done in 1-2 days, it
 sometimes take one week. This is what we can improve.

Thanks Vincent and Jeff for clarifying this (saved me the time to
write an explanation). That's exactly what I meant. :-)

foundation-list mailing list

Re: A question to candidates

2007-11-23 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi Dave,

 I did send these to the membership committee, but voting's nearly open,
 and I think they're important, so I guess I'll just ask...


 The foundation's role is essentially to facilitate the enthusiasm of the
 GNOME project, as Andrew Cowie blogged earlier [1]. This consists of two
 major elements - managing/improving the finances that the foundation
 has, and identifying areas where those finances can help remove
 roadblocks or encourage productive contribution.

 After two years without a full-time employee, the foundation's finances
 are in a decent state, with $150K cash and $50K receivables [2].

 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 (GUADEC + salaries + travel sponsorship)?

I think the best way to spend this money in 2008/2009 is:
- To support (presential) activities that will facilitate contributors
to move the desktop and platform forward.
- To support activities that will streghten the local user groups
around the world.

About the hiring, it really depends. At first sight, I would prefer to
hire an executive director because it would have more impact on GNOME
Foundation actions (marketing, business partnerships, conferences,
etc). However, if we can't find a really good person for the position,
I would prefer to hire a sysadmin. Of course, one thing doesn't
necessarely exclude the other.

 A second question to all candidates: what do you see as the weak points
 of the current board, and how do you propose addressing those weak points?

Weak points:
- Sometimes certain things get stalled because we (Board) don't get
enough feedback (+1's or -1's) among us. We should have more effective
ways of making those daily micro-decisions and getting things done
more quickly.
- We could delegate more often. When delegation is possible, the Board
should   have some sort of list of potential volunteers for certain
types of actions. For example: business partnerships (Dave, Quim,
Jonathan, ...), Artwork (Andreas, Jakub, Vinicius, ...), user group
contacts, etc. Actually, I think I'll start doing this straight away.
- We could be more pro-active on proposing actions to the community.
You solve this by proposing actions. :-P I'm planning to propose some
small developers summits to some maintainers.


foundation-list mailing list

Re: GNOME Foundation Elections 2007. Let's start the debate!

2007-11-20 Thread Lucas Rocha

2007/11/19, Bruno Boaventura [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 With the final list of candidates announced, it's time to submit
 questions about the GNOME Foundation and GNOME Project to this years
 prospective Board of Directors.

 The list, a summary of each candidate's statement and a link to each
 candidate's candidacy can be found at:

 Here we'll go:

 [1] How much impact would being a member of the GNOME Foundation Board
 have on your current contributions to GNOME ?

As I already mentioned in my candidacy announcement, I've been trying
to help the GNOME community to find its own direction and as a Board
member I expect to pro-actively organize or just facilitate
face-to-face meetings for boosting different aspects of our software
stack. Also, after my participation on the Board for some months, I
think I can be really helpful on getting the daily Foundation tasks
done which involves mostly replying different kind of requests (from
community and other organizations) and properly communicating our

 [2] Online Desktop and Services are being talked about as the next
 large step in GNOME - what is your vision for Online Desktop and
 Services and how would you measure them ?

I think the Online Desktop initiative is a great opportunity for us to
enwide the scope of GNOME project from a specific desktop environment
to a broader user experiences set. This means taking advantage of this
huge amount of funny, socially powerful, useful information and
services available on the Web. Embracing Online Desktop also means
trying to bring a new set of goals to GNOME which are related to a
more social and entertaining user experience, something that, in my
opinion, has been lacking in GNOME for a long time.

Currently, GNOME achieves very well the goal of proving a desktop
environment that just works in most of the cases. However, there's
still a long way until we're cool, sexy and atractive enough to catch
the attention of  home/domestic users who just want to have fun and
share stuff with their friends. Online Desktop can help a lot in
this regard.

IMO, we should always keep a platform thinking about Online Desktop.
This means that it's really important to provide as many platform
enablers as possible so that companies, FLOSS communities and other
organizations can create their own services and easily link them to
our desktop. I would be really happy if in 2009 (?) I see something
like Click here to Install the WEB_SERVICE_NAME plugin for GNOME in
Flickr, Youtube, Facebook, Jaiku, etc.

I think the GNOME Foundation (and the Board) can help the Online
Desktop initiative by bringing this topic for discussion to the
Advisory Board members, promoting cooperation among companies. FLOSS
projects and other organizations, and making sure that hackers have
the necessary infrastructure available. Also, there's a lot to discuss
about the wider topic of free (as in freedom) web services (something
that Luis is already investigating?).

 [3] What are the SMART goals that you desire to set for yourself
 should you be elected to the Board ?

I've already mentioned those in my candidacy announcement. I'll just
copy here to avoid linking to another page. As I said, some of them
are about keeping the good current work, others are proposed
improvements and others are both.

Reactive perspective:
 - Respond quickly to requests about sponsorships, partnerships, general
   questions, etc.

Proactive perspective:
 - Incremental production of annual report to make it easier to have something
   in the end of the year;
 - Take care of transparency, provide useful information about current
   Board activities, and bring topics for discussion to membership
   when applicable;
 - Organize and/or facilitate topic-based summits with relevant contributors
   for boosting, hacking, setting direction of diffents parts/aspects of our
   desktop and platform. Those summits could be self-contained or take place
   on existing FLOSS conferences. The topics could be things like: real-time
   communication, panels and applets, GNOME mobile, eye candy,
   online desktop, python bindings, multimedia experience, etc.
 - Keep in touch with user groups to know what they need for their local

 [4] If you were part of the GNOME Board last year and a candidate
 again, what would you like to put as your achievements as a Board
 member ?

In my 4 months as a Board member, it took sometime for me to
understand how the Board works and to be confortable for getting real
tasks. In the last couple months I've been replying the requests that
came in, coodinating the annual report and actively participating on
Board discussions. I would say that now I feel like a Board member.

 [5] Do you think it is important to mentor and coach potential leaders
 in the GNOME community ? If yes, what do you think the role of the
 Board be in this task ? If no, what are your thoughts on this ?


Annual Report Kickoff

2007-09-18 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

It's time to start working on our 2007 annual report! Last year we had
a very nice report. So, let's make it even better this year!

I've created a wiki page to organize the work:

Any kind of contribution is welcome! There are several ways to help:
 - Assign yourself to write one of the sections
 - Add links, references and other information sources to help writers
to produce the content
 - Add new ideas, suggest, review the content
 - Anything else! :-)

If you have any questions, feel free to contact the Annual Report Team
(Silvia, Sayamindu and me).


foundation-list mailing list

Re: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?)

2007-09-10 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

Could you please move this discussion to d-d-l and/or
gnome-infrastructure? This mailing list is definitely not the place to
discuss SCM in GNOME.



2007/9/10, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 08:29:35AM +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
  2007/9/8, Olav Vitters [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
   On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 04:47:31PM +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
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 
  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.

 D-SCM systems exist. Such a translator tool does not. Especially as
 someone has to write that tool, I do not like discussions that involve a
 tool 'someone will write' (well, unless one of the damned-lies people
 shows a clear proposal; including authentication bits).

  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.

 I disagree. It translates to easy of use. Why should I have to care how
 a SCM works? A tool should either warn me strongly before doing
 something wrong, or prevent it outright. It should have a --help that is
 understandable. The man pages should have the most common usages, etc.

 I'm all for some D-SCM tool that provides benefits to people who
 understand (D-)SCM inout, but I need to use it as well. Perhaps git now
 is good enough, no idea. But just discussing benefits of some tool
 without discussing ease of use is ignoring part of the users.

   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

 foundation-list mailing list

foundation-list mailing list

Re: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?)

2007-09-10 Thread Lucas Rocha

I hate to do this but... again... please move this discussion to a
more appropriate mailing list like d-d-l or gnome-infrastructure.



2007/9/11, Sanford Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 On 9/8/07, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  quote who=Sanford Armstrong
   I simply meant that less people are familiar with D-SCM tools and that
   they are somewhat harder for a newbie to learn than C-SCM tools.
  This is an unfortunate cultural relic created by arch/tla, and hilariously
  promulgated by git. Sure, fewer people are familiar with them, but the good
  ones are not harder to learn.

 I'm not really talking about the UI of the D-SCM tool, but about some
 fundamentals of the distributed model.  Getting code and pushing code
 seems to always require an additonal step.  Users have to learn about
 branching and merging up front, whereas in SVN this would come later
 in their education.  If I were a newbie developer I would find this
 confusing.  As I've stated, I don't have much experience with D-SCM,
 but these are the instructions to get started hacking on one project
 using bzr...

 $ bzr init-repo --trees some-project
 $ cd some-project
 $ bzr checkout http://url/to/some-project
 $ bzr branch mainline working
 $ cd working
 $ ./configure
 $ make

 ...compared to the same steps using svn...

 $ svn co http://url/to/some-project/trunk some-project
 $ cd some-project
 $ ./configure
 $ make

 There's just a higher cognitive investment for a newbie getting
 started with D-SCM.  As bzr/git/etc become more common in the FLOSS
 communities, this won't be as much of an issue, though.  And the
 advantages of the distributed model have been well covered here.  :-)

 foundation-list mailing list

foundation-list mailing list

Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07

2007-06-14 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

There's a *big* difference between willing to increase collaboration
between GNOME and KDE and merging their main conferences in one. I
think this merge would bring really bad effects on our community.

- Our conference would lose GNOMEsh identity. This is a subtle but
essential aspect of GUADEC: it's where/when we meet the GNOME
community. We cannot lose that.

- Not everyone in GNOME community is interested in KDE. I understand
that we, as a free desktop project, should be interested in KDE but we
can't expect/enforce everyone in GNOME to think like this. Because we
have similar goals than KDE, this does not mean we should meet at the
same time and place in a generic/big free desktop conference. There
are better places and times for putting both projects together and the
really interested people will be there for sure.

- If we're having problems on organizing our conference, let's try to
solve them in the best possible way in our own boundaries. IMO,
merging with KDE will bring more problems than solving from the
communities point of view. Specially on defining the agenda.

Just my 0,2 cents.


2007/6/11, Lucas Rocha [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  4) GNOME and KDE Conference
 There has been some discussion about a possible merge of GNOME
 and KDE conferences. This has been discussed at the advisory
 board level, along with the KDE e.v. members list. If there is
 considerable opposition from both sides, then it isn't worth
 exploring further. Jeff mentioned that it's likely to come up
 at DAM4.
 ACTION: Jeff to follow up about a possible GNOME and KDE
 conference merge at DAM4.

 Does this mean that your're proposing a new merged KDE/GNOME
 conference? Or is this a matter of scheduling GUADEC and aKademy at
 the same time and place? Or is this a GUADEC replacement with this
 merged conference? This is not clear in the minutes.

 I think it would make sense to have both conferences scheduled in way
 that it would be easier for us, GNOMErs, to attend both. But I don't
 think we should have only one merged KDE/GNOME conference. Even though
 we aim to increase the collaboration with KDE, we're still different
 projects, with different development and organization aproaches.

 My 2 cents,


foundation-list mailing list

Minutes of SoC meeting - 2007/Mar/06

2007-03-06 Thread Lucas Rocha
Hi all,

Here are the minutes I took from the meeting we had today on irc in
#soc. Further discussion about GNOME SoC should happen in
gnome-soc-list from now on.



Behdad Esfahbod
Vincent Untz
Shaun McCance
Danilo Segan
Clare So
Sandy Armstrong
Tristan Van Berkom
Olav Vitters
Ryan Lortie
Lucas Rocha
Christian Kellner
Mads Chr. Olesen
(Other inactive attendees were there too)

1) Actions from previous meeting

 * ACTION: Vincent to talk with sysadmins about getting a sandbox
repository or main repository access for students (DONE)

   Vincent started a thread on gnome-infrastructure about it and will
   ensure that the infrastructure is ready before May.

 * ACTION: Behdad to ask mizmo about a poster (DONE)

   Two proposals:

   DECISION: Use proposal 1 with Google Summer of
   Code on it, and mentioning more explicitly the money involved.

 * ACTION: Lucas to ping web people about putting SoC on the
   front page (NOT DONE)

   SoC announcement should be added to p.g.o front page ASAP.

 * ACTION: Vincent to send a mail to know who would like to be in
   the selection committee (DONE)

   Vincent and Behdad will choose a mixed list of volunteers and
   invited people for the selection committee. Volunteers from the
   meeting: Lucas, Christian, Ryan, Tristan and Vincent.

 * ACTION: Vincent to create the mentors mailing list (DONE)
   Waiting response from sysadmins.

2) New Actions

 * ACTION: Vincent to ask if it will be possible to merge back with
   full history from the separated directory

 * ACTION: Vincent to ask sysadmins to reset gnome-soc-list
   password (DONE during meeting)

 * ACTION: Behdah to subscribe GNOME as a mentoring
  organization (DONE during meeting)

3) Organization of the SoC promotion from a GNOME perspective

 The proposed promotion plan comprises:
  - banner and test on w.g.o frontpage ASAP
  - banner on p.g.o
  - blogs with poster
  - poster translations
  - posters everywhere where it makes sense
  - announcement in mailing lists (gnome-announce-list, gugmasters-list)

 Ryan created a wiki page to coordinate the GNOME SoC ad campaign
 effort in universities:

 * ACTION: Vincent to make a call for translations on the GNOME
  SoC poster

 * ACTION: Behdad to ping p.g.o people to put a banner about SoC

 * ACTION: Ryan to blog about university campaign page
  (DONE during meeting)

4) Collect ideas on SoC/WSOP-like programmes that could be
  proposed to the board

  E-mail ideas to Vincent, Behdad and/or the board.

5) Review of the instructions we've put online for students

 * ACTION: everyone should take some time to review the wiki
  SoC2007 page:

6) AOB


 According to Christian, Danilo stinks and isn't at all as handsome
  as some pictures of him *MIGHT* indicate!

 * ACTION: Christian to find pictures of Danilo where he exposures
  his real not-that-good-looking face ;-)

foundation-list mailing list

Re: Board Meeting Minutes :: 15th February 2007

2007-02-20 Thread Lucas Rocha

Membership Committee

Baris had worked on renewals, but his laptop was recently stolen so he has
to start again. There's a membership committee meeting next week where
this will be discussed, along with other topics (like membership
applications taking a long time to be processed, and new members for the
committee). Vincent will again be the board representative for the
membership commitee this year.

I can/want help the membership commitee if needed. Just let me know.

foundation-list mailing list