Re: Wrapping up Bugzilla migration

2021-05-17 Thread Luis Villa
RIP old buddy!

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 7:45 AM Bartłomiej Piotrowski 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I have been looking at Bugzilla migration requests today and have some
> related announcements.
>
> First of all, if for some reason you are still using Bugzilla, you
> should stop and move to GitLab. I hope it's not a surprise to anyone.
>
> Infrastructure team will be accepting bugs migration requests till the
> end of May 2021. After this date, we intend to turn bugzilla.gnome.org
> to static HTML page and decommission its infrastructure. A specific date
> will be announced in June.
>
> I know some of these requests are not resolved for years, but I'm slowly
> going through the queue. Please let me know if we should prioritize
> specific migrations or if you have any questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Bart
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Open Letter to the IT community, the GNOME Foundation, and Niel McGovern

2019-10-02 Thread Luis Villa
Neil's blog post, for those missing it:
https://blog.halon.org.uk/2019/09/gnome-foundation-relationship-gnu-fsf/

For my part, I want to apologize to everyone involved in GNOME for not
pushing GNOME to formally sever its ties with GNU a decade ago, which is
the first time in my email archives I can find formal complaints about
Richard's sexism. (His imperious 'I am the dictator of GNU, GNOME MUST OBEY
ME' behavior leaves a nearly 20 year-long trail across my inbox as well.)
Focusing on this particular offense is a mistake - there are two decades of
offensive, problematic communication and ineffective leadership, of which
this is only the latest.

I'm glad Neil is taking that step now, am fully supportive, and very sorry
that it took so long. Software freedom is central to who we are, and
Richard's leadership of GNU has actively set back software freedom, both by
running GNU like an ineffective personal fiefdom and by repeatedly
offending many people who might have been fruitful contributors.

I'm sad about this - there's an alternate history where GNOME is an active
part of a strong, healthy GNU project. But GNU is neither of those things
right now, and Richard is a huge part of it. It's long past time for us to
send a message about it.

Neil, I wonder if there's space for coordination with other "peripheral"
GNU projects about this? It seems like individuals quitting their FSF
membership was important to the board's action there, and perhaps
organizations doing the same with GNU might be an effective way of sending
the message there.

Luis

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 8:10 AM Jake D. Parsons via foundation-list <
foundation-list@gnome.org> wrote:

> Greetings;
>
> I attached a text file with the text that gave me my basis for this
> accusation
> from Neil McGovern' s blog: Liberal Musings.
>
> I call for Neil McGovern to step down from his position as the Executive
> Director of the GNOME Foundation for the betterment of software freedom,
> basic civility in the community, ethics, and professionalism between the
> community and the world at large.
>
> It is one thing for someone to not have reading comprehension skills and
> it is a magnitude of another to personally jump on the bandwagon to defame,
> criminally libel, and outright lie, about what RMS said in the infamous
> letter. It is unethical and unprofessional for someone in an Executive
> position to do so. Let me be very clear: the words used and how they were
> used in this campaign against RMS are grounds for him to sue a lot of
> people if he so choosed to do so. His opponents lacking his ethical rigour
> know he won' t and mistake his virtue as a weakness and used criminal and
> low brow methods against him. Very sore losers since they obviously cannot
> argue him.
>
> First this is what Neil McGovern wrote:
>
> "This came after the president of the FSF made some pretty reprehensible
> remarks saying that the “most plausible scenario is that [one of Epstein’s
> underage victims] presented themselves as entirely willing” while being
> trafficked."
>
> This poor victim was already trafficked Neil McGovern (your actions were
> so despicable I refuse to call you with any civil salutation), Epstein was
> prostituting her. Two separate crimes but you apparently picked one to care
> about, the one that brings outrage and people stop analyzing what you are
> saying as a whole based on emotion.  As anyone who has lived on the
> streets, or worked with street people knows, Mr.Stallman was perfectly
> right in what he was saying.
>
> This can be easily observed by driving to a red light district and
> pretending to be a client. There is also the thing called Stockholm
> Syndrome where kidnapped females after release sympathize and defend their
> kidnappers. Romans and the Sabines ~2, 600 years ago. It happens over and
> over where the coerced is presented as willing. It is a very documented,
> heavily researched, fact that is recognized from psychology too social
> workers and your outrage of someone pointing out the obvious in the know
> only shows it is you at fault for misinterpretation of easy adult reading
> and then going overboard in your reaction.
>
> McGovern should have consulted prostitutes, rape victims, kidnap victims,
> psychologists, people who have experience and professional credentials in
> the subject matter before he unethically and unprofessionally threatens
> another organization with  "...Richard to step down from FSF and GNU and
> let others continue in his stead. Should this not happen in a timely
> manner, then I believe that severing the historical ties between GNOME, GNU
> and the FSF is the only path forward." That is blackmail based on libel.
> Two for two in criminal activity here and this is the Executive Director of
> GNOME? The resignation of RMS only makes a point more solid; that Neil
> McGovern used his professional office to further a personal, or corporate,
> the source only known to him or insiders, agenda using a 

Re: Code of Conduct Adoption Process

2016-09-13 Thread Luis Villa
This is terrific to see. I'm sorry that I probably don't have time to help
out much, but look forward to the final result.

Luis

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:49 PM Nuritzi Sanchez <
nurit...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:

> Dear Foundation Members,
>
> GNOME has never had a standard code of conduct for events. This has
> historically placed a burden on GUADEC organizers in particular, as they
> have had to draft and take responsibility for a code of conduct every year.
>
> This GUADEC, a group of us formed a working group to try and resolve
> this, by proposing to draw up a standard code of conduct for GNOME events.
> This effort has been endorsed by the Foundation Board of Directors and we
> are now in the process of researching codes of conduct to inform the one we
> will propose.
>
> *I'm writing to see if anyone else is interested in joining the Code of
> Conduct working group* and to give Foundation members information about
> how they can participate in the process.
>
> We will be meeting regularly (every other week) to push this project
> forward so that we prepare it in time for the 2017 GUADEC committee to
> consider, and in time to make it available during the 2018 GUADEC bid
> process. The Code of Conduct for events will be a phase one project for
> the working group, and we plan to work on the Code of Conduct for the GNOME
> community as a phase two project.
>
> The committee will be doing the legwork of researching and proposing the
> Code of Conduct, but Foundation members will have opportunities to give
> feedback, and ultimately the Board will vote on the proposal. Below, you
> can find more information on the proposal process itself. We've tried to
> make it an analytical process since it can otherwise be an emotionally
> charged subject.
>
> *If you are interested in the group's progress, but don't want to commit
> to joining the group*, you can stay updated on our progress by following
> the meeting minutes and other materials posted at
> https://wiki.gnome.org/Diversity/CoCWorkingGroup/
>
> *At this time, we encourage you to email coc-working-group-l...@gnome.org
> *, or any of the committee members
> privately, with any of the following you'd like us to consider:
>
>- Code of Conduct resources
>- Details of incidents you have observed or been involved in, and
>which are relevant
>- Other specific feedback regarding codes of conduct
>
> coc-working-group-l...@gnome.org is a private mailing list for members of
>  the code of conduct working. Alternatively, you can share your feedback
> with any working group member(s) privately, and they will provide an
> anonymized summary to the working group. You can provide further
> instructions to them on how you want your feedback to be shared.
> Information shared with the working group might be shared anonymously with
> the Board and the community unless otherwise specified (e.g. as not to be
> shared, or as ok to be shared with personal identification by all affected
> parties).
>
> You can also email us if you'd just like to learn more, or talk to us on
> IRC at #diversity.
>
> Thank you in advance!
>
> Sincerely,
> Nuritzi
>
>
>
> Code of Conduct for Events
>
> Overview
>
> *Why is this important? *
> Having a code of conduct is an essential part of holding conferences, and
> is often a sponsorship requirement. It is also important for GNOME's health
> and longevity as it will ensure that the project is welcoming and inclusive
> for both current and prospective GNOME members. While GNOME is generally
> a friendly and welcoming place (yay!), there has been a small number of
> incidents over the years where a Code of Conduct has, or should have,
> helped the community.
>
> Each year, organizing groups had to draft their own Code of Conduct for
> their event and there has often been disagreement that surrounded the
> adoption of a Code of Conduct for an event. Having a standard event Code of
> Conduct will remove work from the event organizers and uncertaintly for the
> community members for what to expect at the event. It will also make it
> easier to support event organizers, through standard processes and 
> theestablishment
> of a dedicated support team for Code of Conduct issues.
>
> We want to make sure there is a consistent standard for the GNOME
> community across the globe. As such, the Code of Conduct will need to
> highlight areas that will change across geographic locations. We also
> recognize that we need to better define what a "GNOME event" is and when
> organizers will be expected to use the standard Code of Conduct.
>
> *Our** Plan*
> We have assembled a Code of Conduct Working Group to gather feedback among
> community members and propose a standard event Code of Conduct. The details
> for our proposal process are below. Once the standard Code of Conduct is
> approved, this team will also provide ongoing support to event organizers
> with its enforcement.
>
> The Board has already 

Re: This week in Gnome?

2016-05-19 Thread Luis Villa
Wikimedia has a pretty good "this week in", and it adds a lot of value. But
it is a lot of work to do well.

(I seem to recall we even used to have one in GNOME, though I can't find
evidence of that offhand. Would have been at least a decade ago.)
Luis

On Wed, May 18, 2016, 6:33 PM Michael Catanzaro 
wrote:

> On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 23:36 +, John McHugh wrote:
> > Was thinking that maybe it would be a good idea to set up a this week
> > in
> > gnome blog.
>
> Can you make it happen?
>
> It sounds like a good idea to me, but it needs someone to make it
> happen.
>
> Michael
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Minutes of the Board Meeting of January, 23th, 2015

2015-02-04 Thread Luis Villa
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Alberto Ruiz ar...@gnome.org wrote:

 - I don't think that finding an ED is easy (it's precisely because I think
 it's extremely hard that I think we should putting a lot of efforts there)


+1 to this. Having been involved in the last two ED hires, it's not easy.
But the earlier the process starts the better.

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


Re: Minutes of the Board Meeting of January, 09th, 2015

2015-01-26 Thread Luis Villa
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:

  * ED search


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


Re: GNOME, Bounties and paid development [Was: Re: OPW; Where does the 500$ for each GSoC goes?]

2014-09-17 Thread Luis Villa
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:

 Luis
 worried that making the TODO list the Bountie list was
 dangerous, because people might end up doing only the things
 people pay for. Have we already started down this slop already
 with company involvement?


 https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2004-August/msg00173.html

 I think Luis Villa's concern still is valid.


Almost a decade old. Jeebus.

With that out of the way: it is still a valid concern, but there are ways
around it - since that time a variety of crowdfunding sites have sprung up
that could let people other than the Foundation pitch in and select goals.

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


Re: Agenda for board meeting April 8th

2014-04-08 Thread Luis Villa
Perhaps a naive question, but I would have expected discussion of hiring a
new ED - is that being handled in a separate hiring committee?

Luis


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Andreas Nilsson li...@andreasn.se wrote:

 Hello Foundation members!
 Next board meeting is April 8th at 16:00 UTC

 This is the agenda:
 * Travel sponsorship for 2 attendees to go to 15th FISL (867 USD)
 * Travel sponsorship for LGM for two attendees.
 * Outstanding reimbursements
 * Budget
  * We still lack a budget for this fiscal year.
  * OPW project has grown a lot. This is great! However, we are taking a
 greater financial risk handling the money between the organizations and the
 attendees. It also makes it a bigger work burden and we need to discuss how
 to handle this.
 * Upcoming events
  * GUADEC 2014
  * GNOME.Asia
 * License grant (trademark) to use the GNOME Foot for worldofgnome.org
  * We were asked to license the use of a modified GNOME Foot logo for
 worldofgnome.org, let's vote on it

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

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


Re: Andrea Veri - GNOME's new part-time sysadmin hire!

2013-01-24 Thread Luis Villa
Terrific news!

And thanks also to all the supporters of the Foundation over the year
who have made this sort of hire possible - this investment in
infrastructure and support is extremely important to GNOME's long-term
health.

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote:
 In the spirit of the below email from last week, I'm extremely pleased to
 announce that the Foundation is hiring Andrea to work as our new sysadmin
 contractor. We've been without someone in this position since Christer
 stepped down last year, and Andrea has really been sensational as a
 volunteer and done a great deal of the work in the meantime.

 I'm confident that Andrea will continue to do a great job for GNOME! And
 we've got a lot of work to do.

 Thanks to the rest of the sysadmin team, the GNOME board and those of you
 who emailed me suggesting that we do this very thing.

 karen

 On Wed, January 16, 2013 3:58 am, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
 Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org a écrit:

 I've finally managed to migrate all the services to a new machine. You
 should be able to apply/renew your membership and request changes to
 your
 accounts again.

 \o/.  This was fast!

 Thanks for your patience

 No.  Thank *you* for the awesome work and extreme dedication.



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


Re: US Members

2012-08-03 Thread Luis Villa
Didn't we have a map of member locations at some point? Or was that just
p.g.o blogs?

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jared Jennings jaredljenni...@gmail.comwrote:

 Mike,
 Thanks for the response. Shoot! Wish I had known that sooner. I've been in
 Columbus for 3 weeks and will be back in Sept.
 I hope you have a great time.

 -Jared



 On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Michael Hill mdhil...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Jared Jennings jaredljenni...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Are there any members in the US, say around Missouri or Texas? I
 wouldn't
  mind grabbing a drink together.

 Jared, I know it's a bit of a hike, but there'll be a number of us
 converging on the Open Help Conference in Cincinnati next weekend.
 Canadian and American Foundation members will be well represented. A
 couple of other new members will be there.

 Mike



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


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


Re: Facilitating the Integration of Free Software into Academic Courses (was Re: Questions for the board election candidates)

2012-05-24 Thread Luis Villa
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Behdad Esfahbod beh...@behdad.org wrote:
 On 05/24/2012 06:49 PM, Joanmarie Diggs wrote:
 * They are not familiar with -- and thus not comfortable teaching --
   all the tools we use.
 * They want certainty in terms of assignments and projects.
 * They want predictability with respect to a schedule.
 * They want a curriculum they can follow.
 * They do not want to be pioneers.

 BUT, they seem to truly dig the idea other than that.

 FWIW, Software Carpentry is one of the more successful experiment I've seen in
 the Free Software meets Academic Courses experiments.  Thought I share the 
 link:

  http://software-carpentry.org/

Seneca College's collaboration with Mozilla has also, by all accounts,
been a raging success:

http://zenit.senecac.on.ca/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

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


Re: Brian Cameron - Stepping down from the board

2012-05-22 Thread Luis Villa
Brian-
Thanks for your selfless service the past few years. Your dedication,
including to some of the board's most thankless tasks, has been
admirable and will be very difficult for the board to replace.

Luis

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote:

 Friends in the GNOME community:

 After serving 4 terms on The GNOME Foundation board of directors, I will
 be stepping down at the end of this term.

 I would like to thank everyone in the community who has supported me
 and allowed me to represent them on this board.  It has been a
 profoundly rewarding and truly inspirational experience to help The
 GNOME Foundation and GNOME community to grow.

 The years that I have served on the board have been exciting and
 productive times.  I am proud to have served as president and secretary;
 to have been involved with the development, release and celebration
 surrounding the GNOME 3 release; and to have helped with the
 development of successful GNOME programs like the Outreach Program for
 Women.  In my time on the board, I have witnessed so much growth within
 the community.  Since then, the GNOME Foundation has hired two executive
 directors, started having successful annual summits in Asia, and has
 more than doubled the number of hackfests held each year.  Just to
 mention a few highlights.

 My stepping down should not be viewed as me becoming less involved
 with GNOME.  I plan to continue working on GNOME for Oracle and expect
 that I will continue helping the GNOME Foundation and community in
 many ways.  I mostly feel that it is just time for me to step down to
 reclaim some of my life back.  4.5 years (including one 18-month term
 in 2008-2009) is a long time to serve on The GNOME Foundation board of
 directors.  I believe that only Jonathan Blandford served as a board
 member for a longer period of time (5 years).

 With the two most senior board members (Germán and myself) both
 stepping down at the end of this term, it is especially important for
 passionate people to serve the community.  So I again encourage people
 who are considering to run for the board to step forward.  It is a great
 way to increase one's involvement with GNOME and free software and to
 help make sure that GNOME continues to rock.

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


Re: New Foundation Members

2012-02-17 Thread Luis Villa
That's great to hear! Congratulations to the long list of new members.

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
 Hi,

 this is the first time we actually receive so many membership's
 applications in just two weeks and I'm glad to notice that
 the GNOME Foundation is increasing its value.

 But here we go with a list of the newly approved members:

 1.  Olivier Sessink (Bluefish's author, huge Bugzilla's contributions)

 2.  Antono Vasiljev (GObject Introspection, Bug triaging and fixing,
    GNOME Esperanto Translator)

 3.  Christian Hergert (contributions to Glib, GTK)

 4.  Nick Richards (GTK+ and Empathy code contributions)

 5.  Eduardo Lima Mitev (Instrospection related fixed to Grilo, glib)

 6.  Guillaume Emont (Code contributions on Gstreamer and Grilo, bug
    triaging and fixing, blog posts about GNOME technologies)

 7.  Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen (Deskbar-applet and Zeitgeist
    maintainer, code contributions on several GNOME Modules)

 8.  Raluca Elena Podiuc (GsoC's student working on integrating Cheese
    with Empathy)

 9.  Srishti Sethi (GsoC's student workin on GCompris, represented
    GNOME at FUDCon India 2011)

 10. Daniel Espinosa Ortiz (Libgda's maintainer, GNOME-DB's
    contributions, bug fixing and triaging)

 11. Chandni Verma (GNOME's OPW internship working on Empathy, GNOME's
    Asia organization and Marketing contributions)

 12. Daniel Williams (NetworkManager  ModemManager maintainer, code
    and bug triaging / fixing contributions over several GNOME Modules)

 13. Joone Hur (WebKitGTK+ and WebKitClutter contributions, GNOME
    Promoter in South Korea)

 14. Tamara Atanasoska (Anjuta's contributions during GsoC, GNOME
    Promoter in Macedonia)

 15. Guido Günther (krb5-auth-dialog's developer, NetworkManager 
    ModemManager code contributions)

 16. Damien Lespiau (Clutter-GStreamer's Maintainer)

 17. Philippe Normand (WebKitGTK, Gstreamer)

 18. Yu Liansu (GNOME's OPW internship, GNOME Design)

 19. Margaret M. Ford (GNOME's OPW internship, GNOME Design)

 * Syntax is Name Surname (area of involvement)

 For any further question you may have, feel free to mail us at
 membership-committee@gnome org. (or me directly)

 Andrea Veri,
 on behalf of the GNOME Membership Committee

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

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


Re: GNOME Foot Logo Trademark

2012-01-23 Thread Luis Villa
Big thanks are due to Brian and SFLC for perservering with this.

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote:

 Foundation Members:

 I am happy to report that the GNOME Foot logo currently used by GNOME
 has been trademarked as Reg. # 4063108 filed November 29, 2011.

 The GNOME Foundation is aware that we need to renew the GNOME word mark
 (Reg. #3142483) before September 2012, and we are now working to get
 this done.

 With the recommendation of the SFLC and Karen Sandler, the GNOME
 Foundation is not planning to renew the trademark for the old GNOME
 foot logo used with GNOME 1.x (Reg. #3142484) since this logo is no
 longer actively used with any GNOME products.

 More detail about GNOME Trademarks can be found here:

   http://foundation.gnome.org/licensing/

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


Re: Changes in Membership Committee

2010-03-22 Thread Luis Villa
Thanks to all of you for doing a very important and very
underappreciated role in the project.

Luis

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Bruno Boaventura
brunoboavent...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello!

 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


 [1] http://live.gnome.org/MembershipCommittee
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

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


Re: Stormy's Update: Weeks of February 15th and 22nd

2010-03-01 Thread Luis Villa
2010/3/1 Stormy Peters sto...@gnome.org:
 GNOME Foundation IRC meeting.

How did this go?

(And as for feedback: I think these are terrific; please keep them coming!)

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


Re: State of Foundation charter

2010-02-24 Thread Luis Villa
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Jonh Wendell jwend...@gnome.org wrote:
 Hello, folks.

 I'm taking a look at http://foundation.gnome.org/about/charter/ , which
 mentions it's still a draft, from Oct 2000!

 Do we have a final version, or is it the final version so that it can be
 renamed?

1) There is no official version which is newer than that.

2) Many moons ago I started collecting feedback for a final version
here: http://www.co-ment.net/text/141/ but never integrated them into
a final text. More comments would obviously be welcome, and if someone
wanted to take on the drafting and incorporation of those comments, I
doubt the board would object. (I believe I have a more modern draft on
a hard drive at home, but I can't get to that until Tuesday, I'm
afraid.)

3) Note that the charter has no legal force, so the fact that it is
'incomplete' is not really important. That said, I agree it would be
nice to update it as a statement of our values and organizational
principles, and to remove or clarify things that have changed.

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


Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Luis Villa
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 this effect. If there's an
 unwritten policy, I'd encourage the Board to write it down in clear and
 explicit terms and get it agreed to by the membership, since there's not
 necessarily any actual common understanding of what such a policy says or
 means, if that's the case.

To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down.
That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear
and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost
willful ignorance of our history, culture and policy to suggest
otherwise.

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


Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Luis Villa
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote:
 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 this effect. If there's an
 unwritten policy, I'd encourage the Board to write it down in clear and
 explicit terms and get it agreed to by the membership, since there's not
 necessarily any actual common understanding of what such a policy says or
 means, if that's the case.

 To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down.

It has been pointed out that in fact it has been written down:
http://live.gnome.org/ProjectPrerequisites

and in fact I think I probably helped write it down; I'm looking
through my email to see when we had that discussion, but I'm pretty
sure that when we wrote it it was so non-controversial that it was not
discussed very much, so it won't leave much trail in my inbox.

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


Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Luis Villa
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote:
 On 1/17/10 12:48 PM, Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org wrote:

 To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down.
 That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear
 and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost
 willful ignorance of our history, culture and policy to suggest
 otherwise.

 Perhaps less official because it's just on the wiki, but:

 http://live.gnome.org/ProjectPrerequisites

   The project must be free/open source software.

 Ah. That's fine. Free/open source software. I have no issue with this, and
 it would, in fact, seem to support what I've been saying.

 But yes, Luis, I wholly agree with you.  I can't imagine why
 anybody would ever think it's OK to host non-free software
 on gnome.org.

 Did anyone say that they thought it was OK to host non-free software on
 gnome.org? I'm pretty sure I never suggested anything like that. Please let
 me know where I might have inadvertently created such an impression, if
 indeed I did.

You suggested that there might be doubt or controversy about such a
thing, or that such a position might not reflect community consensus.
As best as the rest of us can tell, you're the only one who doubts
that this is the community consensus, which strongly suggests that you
might have some doubts yourself.

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


Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Luis Villa
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote:
 On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 22:52 +, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:

 [CUT]

 The last few mails in this thread suggest that people are happy with this
 aspect of GNOME's philosophy.  So it's something worth maintaining.  How do
 we ensure that newcomers see the philosophy and the reasons for avoiding or
 rewriting non-free/non-open-source software?

 Using the term free software helps because it leads people to make a
 connection with a philosophy that answers exactly that question. Other
 helpful measures can include more prominently displaying the fact that GNOME
 insists on freedom, and explanations of why software freedom is valuable.

 As the GNOME community's values have a strong ethical ground, I question
 the necessity of the FSF's philosophical help.

The FSF is welcome to give their advice; and should be treated with
respect when they do give it, the same as anyone else. This is
particularly true in this area, where we know we are walking a
difficult line between freedom and conciliation with proprietary
software, and we have a lot of influences pushing us in the direction
of proprietary software and not all that many pushing us in the other
direction.

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


Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Luis Villa
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 anti-proprietary
 software. We believe, promote, use and write free software.

 We are excited when companies and individuals use GNOME technologies
 because we believe it brings us closer to our mission and vision of a
 free desktop (or mobile interface) accessible to everyone. Sometimes
 those companies are proprietary software companies and while we hope
 that they move closer to free software in the future (and that we are
 helping them do so with the use of GNOME), we are delighted that they
 have chosen to use GNOME and will help them and their customers.

 This is a great, positive way of saying things that I consider to
 reflect the long-standing views of the GNOME community and is inclusive
 of the diversity of opinions that we have.

 Continuing a negatively framed debate like does the GNOME community
 believe that proprietary software is immoral is not helpful. I hope
 Lefty will take a step back and consider whether his survey actually has
 a real purpose in guiding the activity of the GNOME project.

 We have a lot of software to write, we have a lot of users to get our
 message to. I think there's a responsibility on all of us, and
 especially those who could be seen (by virtue of holding a position on a
 GNOME board) as representing GNOME, not to get sidetracked into argument
 for the sake of argument.

+1 to both Owen and Stormy's statements.

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


Re: Stormy's Update: Week of December 7th

2009-12-14 Thread Luis Villa
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 mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-14 Thread Luis Villa
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 FSF. The GNOME Foundation is part of
 the FSF, and we sometimes disagree with the FSF, and we're all fine this
 way.

 Humm, *now* I'm confused.  What does it mean that The GNOME Foundation is
 part of the FSF?

 As for GNOME being a GNU project, what that means is explained here:

  http://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.html

Note that we've always ignored about 90% of this page with no ill
effects for either us or GNU.

Which is really my position on the whole thing: the adults in this
project have always treated requests from GNU the same way we treat
requests from any other community member- if it makes sense, we do it;
if it doesn't make sense, we ignore it. Usually we ignore it quietly.
I will try to refrain from speculating as to why this particular
suggestion was ignored so loudly, but I'd suggest that quietly is
better.

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


Re: Stormy's Update: November 21st-29th

2009-11-29 Thread Luis Villa
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 towards
being a more serious organization.

(And the rest is great too ;)

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


Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

2009-07-21 Thread Luis Villa
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.

 It is not a good thing for the GNOME Foundation to support Amazon in
 this way.  Amazon is one of the main perpetrators of DRM
 (see http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/07/orwell-2009-dystopia).

Amazon was also the first significant provider of mainstream
commercial music to offer a 100% DRM-free music store, and also the
first (as far as I know) to offer a GNU/Linux client (albeit a
non-libre client) for their music store. So their record contains
significant strengths as well as significant weaknesses- certainly
glaring weaknesses, but probably more strengths (from our perspective)
than any other purveyor of commercial mainstream culture.

This is not to say I'm rushing out to buy a Kindle; I really want one
but haven't pulled the trigger exactly because of the DRM. But using
Amazon affiliate codes to raise revenue for the Foundation is a world
apart from endorsing Kindle's DRM.

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


Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

2009-07-21 Thread Luis Villa
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 to
    direct Amazon referral fees for their purchase to GNOME.

 It is not a good thing for the GNOME Foundation to support Amazon in
 this way.  Amazon is one of the main perpetrators of DRM
 (see http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/07/orwell-2009-dystopia).

 Amazon was also the first significant provider of mainstream
 commercial music to offer a 100% DRM-free music store, and also the
 first (as far as I know) to offer a GNU/Linux client (albeit a
 non-libre client) for their music store. So their record contains
 significant strengths as well as significant weaknesses- certainly
 glaring weaknesses, but probably more strengths (from our perspective)
 than any other purveyor of commercial mainstream culture.

And I think this goes without saying, but it may bear repeating:
because our goal is a desktop for average users as well as lovers of
freedom, GNOME can't exist in a cultural vacuum. We should do
everything we can to work against DRM, to support sources of Free
culture, and to educate users about Free culture, DRM, and
non-patent-encumbered media formats.[1] But we also have to make
compromises sometimes, so that users of our desktop can still access
and interact with the broader culture they live in. On the grand scale
of these compromises, this seems like a particularly small and easily
acceptable one.

Luis

[1] I imagine we'd welcome continued suggestions on how to better
educate users about these compromises, as usual?
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Stormy's update: Week of July 13th

2009-07-21 Thread Luis Villa
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 share his opinion of the move with other
members, as he has done. You certainly have not shied away from
sharing your opinions without getting elected to the board; Richard
should be no different.

[Mind you, I think Richard has crossed many lines in the past, and I
don't condone that (I will have more to say about that in August), but
when he is behaving he's entitled to his opinion.]

 We're not the Internet police.

No, but we're an organization with moral goals as well as practical
ones, and we should continually question our motivations and
strategies to make sure we're doing the best possible job of balancing
those ends. Richard and I have loudly disagreed about how to strike
that balance in the past, we disagree on this issue, and I assume we
will again in the future. But the day we don't at least take into
account moral considerations is the day I write a very large check at
the Apple store.

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


Re: GNOME Board of Directors Foundation Elections Spring 2009 - Preliminary results

2009-06-29 Thread Luis Villa
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 results?

Not sure if there is a way in the Charter to trigger a re-vote in case of
dispute.



2009/6/25 john palmieri john.j5.palmi...@gmail.com



  On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
   Hi,The way ...

   Deciding on the correct method after the elections seems a bit off to
 me.  A member who voted sh...
 --
 John

   ___  foundation-list
 mailing list  foundation-list...




-- 
Andy Tai, a...@atai.org

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


Re: irc board meetings?

2009-06-11 Thread Luis Villa
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 the Foundation
 community would be interested in participating.

 Moderated would mean only the board members would be able to talk in
 that channel ;-) so they wouldn't be able to participate but only
 attend.

Sort of. What fedora does is have two channels:

* a public, unmoderated channel, where anyone can ask a question/make a comment.
* a public, moderated channel, where only the board can speak.

A moderator (board member?) relays the best questions from the first
channel into the second channel, so that the second channel is still
legible/sensible, but there is a way for the community to ask
questions of the board.

We might consider using http://moderator.appspot.com/ or something
similar to do the question asking, instead of a second IRC channel.

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


irc board meetings?

2009-06-10 Thread Luis Villa
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 that maybe maybe we
should have Fedora-style public board
IRC meetings? They (sort of) describe what they do at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC ; as I understand it every
other board meeting is held in public-but-moderated IRC; transcripts
are cleaned up and made available later.

I'm particularly interested to hear from folks who are members of both
communities- are these useful/valuable over there? Anything you'd
change?

Thinking out loud-
Luis
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


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

2009-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
[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 m...@jasonclinton.com:
 On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:

   What do you expect from the foundation?

 Leadership. I want there to never be another DVCS mutli-year long flame war. 
 The only reason it ended is that Red Hat has the people, servers and 
 bandwidth to JFDI for something of that magnitude. That worked that time. But 
 Red Hat shouldn't be forced in to taking three-four employees off their other 
 responsibilities to prevent GNOME from tearing itself apart. We need a way to 
 make authoritative decisions in a healthy way and then to share the 
 responsibility of making it happen without giving the appearance of back-room 
 dealings or rule by fiat.

 Consensus building and making travel happen (to affordable locations) are the 
 only two things I want to see the Foundation doing.

[Note that you're talking about two different things when you're
talking about leadership and consensus-building/decision-making
apparatus. I will address leadership here.]

The useful question is probably not 'why is the Foundation not
leading' or 'how could the Foundation lead'; I think probably the
better question is 'why is no one from the community leading'?
(Because you really don't want leadership by elected committee.)

The Foundation may be part of the cause of that. It certainly has
sucked up time and energy from a lot of dedicated people, helping
contribute to burnout without much to show for it. I am not sure how
to avoid that, though. Is the existence of the board hurting in other
ways? It seems some people look to it for leadership, which might hurt
the emergence of other possible leaders. This was not the case when I
started working on GNOME, but may be the case these days- dunno.

Our historic inability to stop bikeshedding is probably part of the
problem; leadership when people are nipping at your heels all the time
is not fun or interesting.

Our supporting corporations have helped contribute to this, probably;
they've hired our best and brightest (good) and made them work on
corporate priorities (less good) or work in private or on projects
related-to-but-not-really-of-GNOME (even less good). That saps
momentum, energy, etc. We've never really had something equivalent to
TLF or Transmeta or Google, allowing our best and brightest to work on
GNOME 90-95% as they saw fit, allowing them to be leaders. All the
partner companies have at times allowed things close to this (Jeff at
Ubuntu, Miguel at Ximian, several RH folks over the years, etc.) but
nothing like kernel has had, or even (as best as I can tell) as KDE
has had the past 4-5 years with aseigo. Maybe a good question to ask
would be 'why is this'?  Is it that the corporation's goals aren't
closely aligned enough with ours? Is is that we've burned them out,
and they've then let the companies pull them away from GNOME? Is it
that because of the bikeshedding (or other reasons) they just think
that dealing with GNOME is more trouble than it is worth, so they
won't invest in our leadership? (Moblin's development pattern suggests
this might be the case.) Many theories to explore here.

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, though.

=

Two more marginal observations on leadership in the Foundation context:

First, historically, the Foundation doesn't lead or make final
decisions because the Foundation and the board were very explicitly
told by the community, through our charter, *not* to lead. The board's
role was infrastructure, support for existing leaders, and
communication with sponsors. This was primarily, as best as I can
tell, in order to prevent the Foundation's sponsors from exerting
control/leadership of the community through the Foundation- if they
were going to do it, they were going to have to do it the
old-fashioned way, by hiring hackers ;)

I'm not sure this argument makes sense anymore, but everyone involved
should understand this is the single biggest reason why the Foundation
does not provide leadership. (It does not explain the failure of other
sources of leadership.)

Second, leadership in a volunteer/multi-corporate context is a tricky
problem. The git thing is a perfectly good example of this. If we'd
had a magical leader who wisely sat down and said 'we will use ',
then what? I'm highly skeptical that magical 'leadership' could have
done much better than what we ended up with- they still 

Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes

2009-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
2009/6/5 Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org:
 Le vendredi 05 juin 2009, à 00:29 -0400, Germán Póo-Caamaño a écrit :
 I have some concerns, it seems longer than is needed (it defines roles
 as president, vice-president, agents and things that does not seem to
 fit with our Foundation. However, IANAL).

 Luis had started something to update the by-laws, I believe. He can
 probably comment on this.

I was working on this, but it was low priority. If you search
co-ment.net for 'GNOME bylaws' I believe you'll find the start of that
work. I am writing this offline and not on my primary machine so no
access to the documents.

There are a couple different issues here, from memory:

(1) some of the issues German mentions are just unfortunate artifacts
of standard cut'n'paste corporate formation. Some of them probably
could be simplified, but many probably could not. I (and everyone
else) should be very loathe to touch any of those things without the
advice of a California non-profit law expert.

(2) Some parts of it are horribly vague because of poor drafting on
our part originally. For example, if I recall correctly the voting
provisions refer to a webpage as the primary determinant of how we
vote, so to change how we vote, just find the webpage in git, commit
the change, and voila! you've changed how the Foundation votes. (I
wish I was kidding.) These things can and should be adjusted and
changed. Brian also had helped create a useful list of these (which I
think, again, are in co-ment.net.)

(3) amendments are not incorporated into the body in a single place.
If nothing else, this needs to be done, for the sake of
documentation/readability.

(4) We still refer in a number of places to the charter, which needs
revision, not because it is unclear (it is quite well written for what
it is) but to update it to reflect who we are now, nearly 10 years
later- which is a different beast than what we were then. This may
also suggest some parallel changes to the bylaws.

All that said, I think reading the bylaws is overrated. Obviously we
have legal obligations which should be understood and respected, but
by and large the bylaws say very little about what we should do or how
we should do it. Those are the bigger questions we face, and the
bylaws have no answer for them.

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


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

2009-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
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, to help other leaders emerge and get the support 
 they need to do their work?' I have no easy answers to either of these, 
 though.

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?

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


Re: Announcing GNOME Board elections 2009

2009-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
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 you to switch elections methods on fairly
short notice, I'm glad it worked out as well as it did. We all owe a
big thanks to the membership and elections committee- they do very
important work with very little attention or thanks.

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


Re: What do you think of the foundation?

2009-05-28 Thread Luis Villa
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 publish/announce/... - in short,
 broadcast to the membership what they're working on.

 My only complaint with the board is that the handling of the minutes really
 has been amateurish. The minutes lurch out months after the meeting, with a
 sorry I've been busy usually attached.

 It's unprofessional.

That's exactly correct. Another term for it is 'volunteer'. :) You're
certainly welcome to volunteer to improve it yourself, of course.

This is not to say I'm proud of the level of service I've provided
this year; I certainly would have liked to have been more responsive
and timely, and deeply wish I could have done better. I certainly
wouldn't be able to improve it next year, which is part of why I'm
stepping away from the board overall. But I've been trying to keep a
lot of other balls in the air, and I have received very little in the
way of thanks for the work I *have* done, so I'm not going to lose too
much sleep over this overall.

I have a lot to say in this thread in general; I think Dave is right
that it is more than high time we re-examined the structure of the
Foundation and relationship of Foundation, board, and community, even
if we might disagree on the particulars. But I'm swamped with a lot of
other things right now so it might take several more days (or even a
week) to get to them. If that isn't professional enough, I apologize
in advance.

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


Re: GNOME Store

2009-04-30 Thread Luis Villa
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 was being a little facetious, but in many case community ware involving
 community members might sell just as well as GNOME brnaded stuff.

 On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Paul Cutler pcut...@foresightlinux.org
 wrote:

 Hi, a few of us were chatting in #marketing in IRC today, and one
 topic that came up, that I believe has come up before, is the creation
 of a GNOME Store to sell merchandise, such as t-shirts.

 Stormy has previously talked to Zazzle, who runs the Mozilla store
 (http://store.mozilla.org/), and it sounds like it's very easy to get
 up and running with them.

 I'd like to propose we form a small team.  Longer term, they'd be
 responsible for reviewing new artwork from the community, helping
 decide which logos should be on different kinds of merchandise,
 helping manage sales or clearance items, and maybe even develop some
 limited time special merchandise for sale, in addition to managing the
 website.

 Short term, we need the team to implement the store.  Action items I
 can think of off the top of my head:

 * Get a GNOME mailing list setup (gnome-store?)
 * Get some artwork - In addition to our foot logo, is there previously
 created GNOME artwork or logos that we can use?
 * Get the artwork to Zazzle and decide what kind of merchandise we
 want to launch with
 * Create the GNOME store web pages in the gnomeweb-wml

 (What else am I missing?)

 Going forward if we can form a steering committee to help manage and
 launch this, it might provide some small income to help the
 Foundation.  If we can get some volunteers, especially from the art
 team and web team, and anyone else, we might be able to get something
 going.

 I'm more than happy to lend a hand if there is interest in getting
 something like this going.

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


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


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


Re: GNOME logo issue

2009-03-04 Thread Luis Villa
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 back in 2006 (I'll let someone else take
  care of it this time) - I'm not sure if we'd get them under trademark
  infringement, it's probably a better bet to use copyright, since it
  appears they just lifted some GNOME artwork for the logo.
 
  I'll let our resident IANALY comment though... Luis?
 
  That is roughly correct. I'll send another letter. Dave, who did you
  send it to the last time?

 Note that I've sent it to all the contact details I can find and all
 have bounced. If anyone else has any contact information, feel free to
 pass it along.

 We're talking about emails or postal letters here?
 http://cqcounter.com/whois/?query=randomimage.us or
 http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/randomimage.us ?
 If it's contact data, could the hosting company be contacted?

Emails only at this point.

I don't want to get into contacting ISPs, for what it is worth.

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


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

2009-02-11 Thread Luis Villa
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

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

 Thanks,
 David B.

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

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

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

 http://www2.netleverage.com.au/index.php?option=com_contenttask=blogcategoryid=85Itemid=93

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

 Does the distribution contain a copy of the License?

 no, not that I have ben able to determine.

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

 no, not that I have ben able to determine.

 Is source code included in the distribution?

 no, definitely not.

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

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

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

 no souce code at all, so its clearly incomplete.

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

 the precise name of the product

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

 the name of the person or organization distributing it

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

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

 see above.

 the exact name of the package whose license is violated

 both rdesktop and  CUPS

 how the license was violated:

 Is the copyright notice of the copyright holder included?

 No

 Is the source code completely missing?

 Yes.

 Does the written offer for source, if given, only give a website and/or FTP
 site where to download the source?

 No offer given.

 Is there a copy of the license included in the distribution?

 No.

 Is some of the source available, but not all? If so, what parts are missing?

 None available.

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

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

 extract from CUPS licence info:
 (http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html )
 The Common UNIX Printing SystemTM, (CUPSTM), is provided under the GNU
 General Public License (GPL) and GNU 

preferential voting, take N

2009-02-02 Thread Luis Villa
So, elections are coming around again and so it is time for me to
raise preferential voting as an option again (and for the last time-
if it doesn't get picked up now, it has to become someone else's
hobbyhorse ;)

Previous discussion here:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2008-February/msg7.html

Unfortunately, I'd hoped that selectricity would be ready for our use
by this time; I see no indication on their blog that new source or
feature releases have been made, unfortunately, which may make it
inappropriate. Mako? :)

Note that the process of changing voting methods is ill-defined. :)
The bylaws (which are binding and require a vote to change) refer to a
webpage (which can probably be edited by anyone with CVS access) which
refers to the charter (which says 'you must cast the same number of
votes as seats', but is not a binding document and has no formal
process 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, Feb 16, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Subject: time to (re)consider preferential voting?
To: Foundation-List foundation-list@gnome.org


[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 probably boiled down to
'I'm unfamiliar with it.' I believe that at the time we'd also have
had to write the software, which would not have been fun. But I've
come around to believing that this is a better way to run elections.

It appears that by the time of our next election, we'll have a
third-party, free software solution available for the problem, used
recently and successfully by FreeCulture.org.
http://blog.selectricity.org/?p=4

I'm still trying to puzzle through the bylaws (which are a bit of a
mess wrt voting) as to what it would take to actually enact this
change (bottom line is probably that the board can just say 'it should
be this way'), but in the meantime I thought it might be good to have
a bit of discussion here around whether or not this is a good idea.

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


Re: GNOME logo issue

2009-02-02 Thread 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:
 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).
 Thanks for the heads-up. In this instance, it is a case of trademark
 infringement, not copyright infringement. I've sent them an e-mail asking 
 them
 to stop using our mark. If they refuse, we'll have to get the foundation's
 lawyers to send a nastygram.

 I was just browsing my email archive for discussions about
 logo usage guidelines, and ran across this.  This site is
 still (or again), using the foot.

 Can we do something about this please?

 Just replying to what I said back in 2006 (I'll let someone else take
 care of it this time) - I'm not sure if we'd get them under trademark
 infringement, it's probably a better bet to use copyright, since it
 appears they just lifted some GNOME artwork for the logo.

 I'll let our resident IANALY comment though... Luis?

 That is roughly correct. I'll send another letter. Dave, who did you
 send it to the last time?

Note that I've sent it to all the contact details I can find and all
have bounced. If anyone else has any contact information, feel free to
pass it along.

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


Re: GNOME logo issue

2009-01-11 Thread Luis Villa
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).
 Thanks for the heads-up. In this instance, it is a case of trademark
 infringement, not copyright infringement. I've sent them an e-mail asking 
 them
 to stop using our mark. If they refuse, we'll have to get the foundation's
 lawyers to send a nastygram.

 I was just browsing my email archive for discussions about
 logo usage guidelines, and ran across this.  This site is
 still (or again), using the foot.

 Can we do something about this please?

 Just replying to what I said back in 2006 (I'll let someone else take
 care of it this time) - I'm not sure if we'd get them under trademark
 infringement, it's probably a better bet to use copyright, since it
 appears they just lifted some GNOME artwork for the logo.

 I'll let our resident IANALY comment though... Luis?

That is roughly correct. I'll send another letter. Dave, who did you
send it to the last time?

Luis (apologies for lag, I'm in jury duty and that has significantly
slagged my time for everything)
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Changes to the GNOME board

2008-12-15 Thread Luis Villa
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
 the remainder of this term. Diego was a candidate for the board in the
 last election, and his energy, new blood, and Latin American
 perspective will be a great addition to the board.

 As I wasn't sure what the procedure was for the board of directors, in
 the case of a resignation, I went and grabbed a copy of the bylaws
 from http://foundation.gnome.org/about/bylaws.pdf  Section 4
 subsection d it states that the board can fill a vacancy by a vote of
 the remaining directors.

 With that said, Congratulations Diego!

 I do have one question about the bylaws, though.  I seem to recall a
 large discussion about changing the term of the directors to be 18
 months instead of 1 year.  However, Section 3 subsection a still
 states that directors hold office for one (1) year.  I also noticed
 that the history information at the bottom of the document states that
 the last change was April 5, 2002.  I'm sure that the discussion I
 recall was more recent than this.

 What is the current term of a member of the Gnome Foundation Board of 
 Directors?

I believe one year, with an exception for the current 18-month term in
order to align elections with the timing of GUADEC.

 What is the official location of the Bylaws governing the Gnome
 Foundation?  If it is the above URL, and the term is not still 1 year,
 how can we get this copy updated?  If it's not this URL, can somebody
 tell me where it is, and can we make foundation.gnome.org link to it
 prominently?

At the moment, there is nothing better than what you've found.

I have been (slowly) in the process of revising our official
documents; I hope to finish and formalize them during the next
semester. If you're interested, you can participate in this process by
editing and commenting on the documents in co-ment.net:

http://www.co-ment.net/list_public/?q=gnome

Not that this excuses the sloppiness on our part, but note that there
is no requirement in CA non-profit law that there be One True Copy of
these documents; it is sufficient to track the original + the
amendments/diffs. (I worked with some documents over the summer where
this situation persisted for decades.) It absolutely makes things an
utter PITA to deal with- like releasing new versions as diffs rather
than new tarballs- but doesn't cause a formal problem for our status
as a non-profit.

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


Re: minutes of last four board meetings

2008-12-11 Thread Luis Villa
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 it could also be dropped altogether and it'd be equivalent.

No, that doesn't work. (If you're still on sysadmin, there is an email
discussing the problem there, may also be discussion in your IRC log
if you were in #g-h 7-8 hours ago.) But thanks for trying.

All of these minutes should be world-readable now, at least, so
everyone should feel free to do so.

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


Re: minutes of last four board meetings

2008-12-11 Thread Luis Villa
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 year. Are
 there any specific goals that the board has identified as things to
 address in this term?

 I'm impressed with the way the advisory board's been getting more
 attention, and with the preparation of the ad board meetings, but what
 is the over-arching theme of the board this year, one year into its 18
 month term?

Among others:
* ad board (as you already noted)
* increased delegation (mobile team, guadec team)
* events (lots of bandwidth spent on gnome.asia, summit, and
hackfests- pushing to still have more of these)
* increased financial transparency (you don't see this in the minutes,
but we get a regular report from Zana now detailing finances
regularly, and we've been more proactive in budgeting and
understanding our long-term financial picture)
* hiring and management (management and advising of Stormy is taking
up a /lot/ of our bandwidth, which is really a good thing- she's
learning from us while she ramps up, and we're avoiding some of the
problems we had with previous employees by being more hands-on. Like
the previous, this is less than obvious from the minutes, since I
don't bother to say 'received and discussed Stormy's status report' in
every set of minutes. I can do that if it would make you feel better,
Dave. ;)
* getting our legal bits in order (this goes in cycles, depending on
my bandwidth; hopefully it will be major focus next semester. Brian's
insurance work also falls into this category.)

And of course the normal miscellany of board life- pushing ahead on
the DVCS survey, for example- lots of little things like that.

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


Re: minutes of last four board meetings

2008-12-10 Thread Luis Villa
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 as a result
 of school work. I've posted the minutes of the last four meetings to
 http://live.gnome.org/FoundationBoardPublic/Minutes

 I plan to (over time) migrate older minutes to that location as well.

 As usual, please feel free to post questions to foundation-list for 
 discussion.

 Thanks, and my apologies again for the delays-
 Luis
 ___
 foundation-announce mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-announce

 --
 Davyd Madeley

 http://www.davyd.id.au/
 08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

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


Re: minutes of last four board meetings

2008-12-10 Thread Luis Villa
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 was when
testing) it works, but if you're logged in, it will fail. I will
continue to try to achieve the right Zen Of MoinMoin ACLs, and in the
meantime, please log out to read the content. Sorry about that!

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


Re: New GNOME Foundation members

2008-11-11 Thread Luis Villa
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=
 bers:

 - Mario Bl=E4ttermann
 - Martin Sevior
 - Ray Wang
 - Seif Lotfy

 If your name is on the list above, you're welcome!!! Feel embraced!
 Being part of GNOME Foundation you're contributing more with GNOME.

 If you aren't on the list, and you are close of one of them, please
 say Welcome to GNOME Foundation and embrace them.

 At your service,

 GNOME Foundation Membership Committee
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

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


Re: Minutes for Directors Meeting of Sept. 3, 2008

2008-09-17 Thread Luis Villa
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 it
 even further? How will this relate to 'high season'?

 Note that early September is also the time when GNOME is usually
 released (this GNOME release is later than usual)

Sorry, that was unclear. The meeting under consideration in Sept. was
a planning meeting for GUADEC '09 held this September '08, not GUADEC
'09 itself.

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


Re: Advisory Board changes?

2008-09-08 Thread Luis Villa
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.

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.

Hope that answers the question-
Luis
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


hiring Stormy Peters as executive director

2008-07-07 Thread Luis Villa
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 with the open source business community for a
long time. For the fuller story on her bio, check out the press
release, linked blow.

Stormy's responsibilities will include (among other things)
strengthening and growing the GNOME Foundation's infrastructure,
working with the Board of Directors, Advisory Board members, GNOME
membership, and other GNOME supporters to create an awesome free and
open source desktop that is easy to use and provide a strong
development platform, and accelerating the adoption of GNOME and
strengthening the Foundation by attracting new industry members and
community contributors. No small task but we think she's up to it.

If you're in Istanbul this week, please say hi to Stormy and welcome
her on  board. If you're not in Istanbul, well, feel free to welcome
her on list or ask questions as well (though of course we're several
hours ahead of many of you, so we might not be as prompt as usual.)

Looking forward to this new era for the Foundation-
Luis and the Board
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Where to find minutes of bi-weekly GF board meetings?

2008-05-25 Thread Luis Villa
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://foundation.gnome.org/about/
 (which says they're sent to foundation-list)

Yeah, that would be good to fix. We're supposed to be wikifying f.g.o
to make this kind of fix easier; not sure where that project stands
exactly.

 but exams have made it difficult for

 Ok, I've no particular urgency on this.  I just happened to be looking for
 the minutes out of personal interest.

 Maybe a way to get meeting minutes out quickly would be to start each call
 by asking who has time to do minutes later that day/week.  Just an idea.

The better thing would be for me to suck less, since I volunteered for
this position when I ran ;) Working on that-

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


Re: Where to find minutes of bi-weekly GF board meetings?

2008-05-19 Thread Luis Villa
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
me to do anything in a timely manner. My apologies.

Luis

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 6:52 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Apologies if this has already been discussed (but if it has, the webpage
 needs to be updated).

 Does the board still have regular (phone) meetings?  And if there are
 minutes, and if they are published, where can I find them?

 Thanks.

 http://foundation.gnome.org/about/

  The Board of Directors meets every other week with a phone conference to
   discuss various topics pertaining to the regular activities of the GNOME
   Foundation and GNOME. The minutes to these meetings are posted publicly
   on the foundation-list archives.

 --
 Ciarán O'Riordan (+32 477 36 44 19) \ Support Free Software and GNU/Linux
 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _ \ Join FSFE's Fellowship:
 http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \  http://www.fsfe.org
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

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


Re: Where to find minutes of bi-weekly GF board meetings?

2008-05-19 Thread Luis Villa
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 to
 foundation-announce about that, but exams have made it difficult for
 me to do anything in a timely manner. My apologies.

Two clarifications:

* 'private board-only' should be read as 'currently board
confidential'; we generally dislike doing anything private and
obviously do that only when absolutely necessary, and we hope at some
point in the near future to reveal as much as possible about this.

* to clarify, this was one regular meeting + one 'special' meeting.
There is at least one other regular meeting whose minutes are stuck in
my queue; I hope to get to that shortly, but as I've just started a
new job this week, my time is going to be sort of sporadic for a
while.

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


Re: Call for hosts for GUADEC 2009

2008-04-23 Thread Luis Villa
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 utterly predictable and utterly unoriginal political
discussions over and over again. There are many other places on the
internet for that.

Luis

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Ali Sabil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 4/23/08, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   I fully agree. We think that the actions of the gnome foundation has a
profound impact on the world, that the choice of venue is important.
That holding the conference in morocco lends the moroccian *regime*
credibility it does not deserve.
  
  Wouldn't you be just spreading some kind of FUD ? What do you know
  about the Moroccan (not moroccian) regime and history ? What did the
  Moroccan people did to you ? Did you ever think that you should stop
  trying to keep the freedom for yourself and start sharing it with
  those who may not have it ?

  Maybe should you rethink your We are the good guys, they are the ugly
  guys kind of mentality ?

  Respectfully,

  --
  Ali



  
2008/4/22, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:03 +, BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
  On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
About GUADEC out of Europe, that's fine as long as the place is Ok 
 for
travel.  Bangalore has the same problem that US has.  Too far...  
 That
said, I love to see GUADEC '11 in Morocco for example...
 
  I wouldn't. GNOME is all about creating more freedom, Morocco is all
  about taking away those freedoms. It would seem weird if the
  conference was hosted in a country so diametrically opposed to what
  GNOME stands for. That and the burning summer heat. :)

 GNOME is People.  Do you have any evidence that the Moroccan *people*
 are opposed to the values GNOME stands for?  We think we in GNOME have a
 great thing to offer, and any person on this planet deserves being part
 of this the same as any other one.  Those people have an oppressing
 regime, ignore them is not a really compelling idea to me.

 --
 behdad
 http://behdad.org/

 Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
  Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759


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

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


Re: Call for hosts for GUADEC 2009

2008-04-22 Thread Luis Villa
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 GUADEC (aka sponsorship).
  
/me wonders about a huge GNOME crowd here in Brazil... :-)


  I like this idea, Jonh!!!
  Brazil seems to be one of the countries with most growth in number of
  contributors in recent years (I'm one of them!!!). The same for Chile.

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
(given the continent's large size). In the end regional conferences
(like FISL or the various gnome.cl get-togethers) seemed more
reasonable. That said, I agree it would be cool and if people can make
it happen I'm sure we could get some support for it- I'd love to go.

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


Re: Call for hosts for GUADEC 2009

2008-04-22 Thread Luis Villa
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
   (given the continent's large size). In the end regional conferences
   (like FISL or the various gnome.cl get-togethers) seemed more
   reasonable. That said, I agree it would be cool and if people can make
   it happen I'm sure we could get some support for it- I'd love to go.

  The LatinAmerican 'Idol' Tour could helps to factorize the costs.

  If Forum do Gnome (Brazil) is held joint to Latinoware, we will have two
  conferences in two weeks.  As far as I remember, Diego Escalante was
  looking for something similar in Perú.  Still is possible to organize
  something between to make a more productive trip for invited speakers.

To be clear, the problem with GUADLAC wasn't the speakers, it was the
audience- getting the large brazilian group to chile, or the large
chilean group to brazil, or _ (fill in blank) made a
single GUADLAC a problem. I agree that a series of smaller conferences
back-to-back would at least make the speakers a better value, but it
wouldn't unite the continent in one place, which is a shame :/

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


Re: Call for hackfest ideas

2008-04-15 Thread Luis Villa
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 things the Board wants to see happen this year is hackfests,
  and the fact that the GTK+ one was a success is a good sign that we
  should do this :-) But to make this happen, we need help from the
  community to come up with ideas of hackfests and we also need help from
  volunteers to lead this effort.

  So if you can think of a topic that would be suitable for a hackfest,
  please talk about it with a few people and share your idea.

I'm curious- I see some fairly low-level suggestions here (gio
porting, pixbuf loaders) but it was my impression that part of what
made the gtk hackfest so successful is that it was at least partially
about decision making rather than coding- the face-to-face presence
made vision-sharing/direction-setting very easy, which led to
important decisions being made, and great hacking as well. Was this
the impression of the folks at the gtk hackfest as well?

If that is part of what made the gtk hackfest successful, should we be
thinking about higher-level stuff (widgets/gadgets, panel replacement,
collaboration software, etc.) where the critical parties need to get
together and make decisions and then write code, as well as/instead of
lower-level stuff where the decisions are known and we 'merely' need
to get coding done? (Coding is obviously important, so I'm not
knocking those, I just am wondering if we should be sure to explicitly
include some of the bigger-picture items as well.)

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


Re: Foundation Budget for 2008

2008-03-12 Thread Luis Villa
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 foot. We'll also be investigating (and likely
pursuing) an EU trademark.

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


Re: Copyright assignment policy

2008-03-11 Thread Luis Villa
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 copyrights have been assigned to the Free Software 
 Foundation, Inc.

  I have personally contacted the individual contributors who gave me their
  permission (informal) to change the copyright assignments in the po-files for
  those translators that had retained copyright and assign that to FSF.

  I have acted so up till now in private conversations.

  Is there an official policy of copyright assignment by contributors?

There is no official policy.

  Who would hold principally the copyright?

Individual authors (or their employers, as appropriate.)

  I have acted up till now from practical standpoint - a common copyright 
 holder
  would find it actually more easy to manage and re-license code.

  Furthermore - will there ever be relicensing of the software?

Given the problem you highlight (vast amounts of code whose copyright
is held by a very distributed set of owners instead of a central
owner, including some sections which are GPL v2-only) this seems
unlikely; or, at least, unlikely without a concerted effort over the
course of years to seek out copyright holders and rewrite code.

[I would like to investigate whether or not GPL v3 is appropriate for
GNOME, but that seems mostly an academic/intellectual exercise.]

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


time to (re)consider preferential voting?

2008-02-16 Thread Luis Villa
[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 probably boiled down to
'I'm unfamiliar with it.' I believe that at the time we'd also have
had to write the software, which would not have been fun. But I've
come around to believing that this is a better way to run elections.

It appears that by the time of our next election, we'll have a
third-party, free software solution available for the problem, used
recently and successfully by FreeCulture.org.
http://blog.selectricity.org/?p=4

I'm still trying to puzzle through the bylaws (which are a bit of a
mess wrt voting) as to what it would take to actually enact this
change (bottom line is probably that the board can just say 'it should
be this way'), but in the meantime I thought it might be good to have
a bit of discussion here around whether or not this is a good idea.

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


Re: reusing / copy of the gnome logo

2008-01-27 Thread Luis Villa
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 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?

Sorry, I mis-typed; I meant igloo.mobi, which at least from here
(admittedly, they say this is 'igloo.mobi United States, so maybe it
is different from a .fr ISP?) has no foot anywhere that I can find.

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


Re: Question to candidates: what about next ODF?

2007-12-04 Thread Luis Villa
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 travel. I should note that
I think that Brad has done an admirable job representing FSF over the
past several years in this forum.

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


Re: two questions for candidates

2007-12-03 Thread Luis Villa
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.

 Would you like to pick someone to discuss this with the FSF?

 Also, I'm not certain how the copyleft nature of the FDL will
 impact the dynamic-collection-of-pages nature of Mallard.

 That someone could discuss this too.  It is not too late for us
 to change the text of the next FDL version, so please don't wait.

Presumably I (or James Vasile on our behalf) can do this, though I'd
really rather not do it in the middle of my exams :) Is there a public
schedule for the next FDL, Richard? I tried to find one on the gplv3
website the other day and failed.

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


Re: two questions for candidates

2007-12-02 Thread Luis Villa
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 gut instinct on this one is 'we're stuck with it whether
 we like it or not', but you know more about the copyright ownership of
 the docs than I do.

Something else to look at, BTW, would be that FDL 2 will apparently be
CC-SA compatible (not clear if that is 'FSF one way compatible' or
'actual two-way compatible', but wikipedia seems to think two-way
compatible), and that may be something we want to look at, since that
appears to be the fastest growing license commons on the non-code side
of the world.

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


Re: two questions for candidates

2007-11-30 Thread Luis Villa
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 think the most pressing thing is that the Foundation and our
  partners need to investigate (with SFLC's help) the GPL v3, and decide
  whether or not to move forward on that. I've been involved with v3 for
  a long time now, and hopefully can help coordinate that effort.

 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 gut instinct on this one is 'we're stuck with it whether
we like it or not', but you know more about the copyright ownership of
the docs than I do.

 Also, I'm not certain how the copyleft nature of the FDL will
 impact the dynamic-collection-of-pages nature of Mallard.

I'd love to look into that if I'm elected; please remind me about the
question if/when that happens. (I'm not really taking down todos quite
yet.)

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


Re: GNOME dependent on Mono

2007-11-29 Thread Luis Villa
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 back my respect after the crap
 they've been spewing.

I'll second this. The fact:fiction ratio of boycottnovell is just
incredibly, incredibly bad.

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


Re: GNOME dependent on Mono

2007-11-29 Thread Luis Villa
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 things 
like:
  
   Sorry, but the negativity of that site greatly outweighs the positive. It
   takes more than a little sucking up to earn back my respect after the crap
   they've been spewing.
 
  I'll second this. The fact:fiction ratio of boycottnovell is just
  incredibly, incredibly bad.

 RMS message read If part of it is not accurate, I hope someone will
 explain. Do you care to sort out what is fact and what is fiction?

Jeff has ably debunked this particular fiction already in the thread,
and more generally ably debunked the FUD that Novell somehow controls
the Foundation. As to the rest, I have better things to do with my
life than to debunk the rest of boycottnovell post-by-post.

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


Re: GNOME dependent on Mono

2007-11-29 Thread Luis Villa
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
   the Foundation. As to the rest, I have better things to do with my
   life than to debunk the rest of boycottnovell post-by-post.
 
  Now what could possibly be better than that?

 boycottboycottnovel.com is still available!

Stabmyselfintheface.com also available!
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Question to candidates: what about next ODF?

2007-11-28 Thread Luis Villa
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 in it's mandate for ODF but is for
 OOXML? Or am I reading your words wrong?

Yes, you are. :) He means that we can't force anyone to do anything.
In the OOXML case, someone came to the board and volunteered, and the
board helped out. There was no mandate there. Similarly, if someone
came and volunteered to work on ODF, the board would (presumably) seek
to join the relevant standards bodies so that that volunteer could
participate. But we can't force anyone to go do that work for us.

  We all appear to agree
  that implementing ODF is good for FLOSS.  However, beyond that
  there's no stick, and a carrot (eg funding) seems inappropriate (why
  this project vs the dozens of others).

 Or one another in particular? For a fake standard, there is funding?

What funding? No one is paying Jody to do what he does on OOXML;
again, he is a volunteer, doing things voluntarily. If someone were to
volunteer for ODF, the board would facilitate it. But the board isn't
going to pay anyone to work on either standard.

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


Re: two questions for candidates

2007-11-26 Thread Luis Villa
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 everyone that ODF shares much of the blame for the
politicization of the process, so the statements about that in the
statement are a little vague.

I suppose it could have been more aggressive about describing
Microsoft as a multiply-convicted monopolist, but everyone already
knows that; being more explicit about it would mostly have been
redundant.

Finally, I'd have liked it to have been more timely. I think Jeff is
right that it would not have changed the impact much (we'd still have
been flamed) but we'd have looked like we were doing it above board,
instead of trying to sneak behind anyone's back.

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

I think the most pressing thing is that the Foundation and our
partners need to investigate (with SFLC's help) the GPL v3, and decide
whether or not to move forward on that. I've been involved with v3 for
a long time now, and hopefully can help coordinate that effort.

More long-term, working with the online desktop folks, and hopefully
with many other interested parties, we need to reframe what software
freedom means in a network-centric world. It is now abundantly clear
to most everyone that source code access is frequently insufficient to
guarantee user autonomy; the question, then, is what additional (or
perhaps different) requirements will help our users maintain their
autonomy in the future. This is much bigger than GNOME, of course, but
it seems likely that we will be at the cutting edge of it, and so
we're going to have to deal with it whether we're the best forum for
it or not :)

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


Re: Questions to the candidates

2007-11-23 Thread Luis Villa
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 school I did in fact
indicate my interest in serving as the executive director. After
having spent a bazillion dollars on law school, my interest in going
directly into non-legal, non-profit work is... low :) So, no.

 Will you attend at least 90% of the board calls?

Having volunteered to be the secretary, obviously my goal is to attend
all board calls. But as the other candidates have already noted, life
comes at you sometimes, so inevitably some meetings are missed.

 Can you accept competing official ISO standards?

 What is your position towards official standards that do not meet the
 gennerally accepted definition of a free and open standard. Such as
 Microsoft OOXML?

Jeff and Vincent have more than adequately addressed these- they are
too vague for me to give more detail than they already have. Suffice
to say that I believe deeply in free, innovative, and competitive
standards, and I will act appropriately.

I will note that I think that the recently released board statement is
fairly balanced and appropriate, given the circumstances.

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


Re: A question to candidates

2007-11-23 Thread Luis Villa
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 (GUADEC + salaries + travel sponsorship)?

I think a lot of the other candidates have had good answers here with
regards to non-hiring spending; in particular I've long thought travel
and micro-meetings (especially geographically distributed ones like
the newly proposed GNOME Asia Summit, and the various meetings in
Latin America), and I proposed such spending at my very first board
meeting (though it didn't happen, for understandable reasons.)

I'd love to have a pro-active system administrator on staff, but I
think a good ED would be a better first hire- they should be able to
increase revenue, allowing us to hire a sysadmin later, which wouldn't
be true in reverse. I've not been privy to the current ongoing job
search, so I'm not sure why we haven't hired a post-Tim exec yet (bad
job description? bad search policy? just lack of good candidates?
etc.?) but obviously understanding that would be one of the first
priorities of a new board, I'd think.

 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?

It is hard for me to speak in specifics, given that I've been fairly
out of the loop with the current board. As I've discussed on this list
before, I do think that communication and delegation could be
improved, but those are ongoing issues that must constantly be worked
on, whether or not they are problems or strengths.

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


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

2007-11-21 Thread Luis Villa
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 way. I'm starting to believe this should be the (main)
   job of one of the directors (it's a bit different from being a
   secretary, because it implies pinging, pinging, pinging, pinging). I'd
   volunteer to do this.

I think it probably works best for the secretary to do this- it is
different than the traditional role of the secretary, but it isn't a
problem to add to that role, and since the secretary has to record the
tasks/actions anyway, it seems reasonable to add it to their plate.

FWIW, I'd probably do it through an online todo list- I'm partial to
tracks [http://www.rousette.org.uk/projects/ ] but I could see doing
it in the wiki as well.

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


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

2007-11-19 Thread Luis Villa
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 them- don't sit on them. I'm
eager to answer them, since what I'm doing is so unusual.

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

It would be purely positive. Currently I am able to do very little for
GNOME; with more time (as I move into the second half of my course at
school) and with better communication (as I work very closely with the
board) I hope to be able to do much more.

[Some of you may remember that I predicted at GUADEC '06 that I
wouldn't be back until 2010; that changed in part because I decided
not to take a fourth year at school; in part because my second year
has proved less time-consuming than I thought it would; and in part
because I see a unique opportunity to apply my skills right now. On
the down side, as I'm now more aware of what I'll be doing after
graduation, I expect that I'll disappear again for a while after
graduation- they don't make it easy for first years at large law firms
:)

 [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 ?

Two things:

(1) I think the board's role in technical/strategic issues like OD and
Services should be fairly minimal, generally. The vision needs to come
from the people designing and implementing the code; the board then
needs to understand that vision and help grease the way for it- for
example, by getting corporate partners on board.

(2) I think it is inevitable that GNOME, or GNOME partners, will be
offering web-backed services to GNOME users. My personal vision for
that is to dot the i's and cross the t's on the legal parts- to make
sure that as we sail into uncharted waters, the rights of GNOME users
and contributors are being protected.

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

I assume by SMART you mean:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_(project_management)

I prefer the related GTD, myself. ;) [Goal: beg someone to write a
kick-ass GNOME-based GTD app. :)

I'll repeat what I said in my candidacy statement: my goal is to be
the legal facilitator for the board for 18 months, and create bridges
between our legal partners (Wilson Sonsini and Software Freedom Law
Center) and ourselves. These issues are basically 'unmaintained' in
hacker-speak. Since they are unmaintained, there is a lot of
low-hanging fruit that I can pick once I'm elected. (If someone really
wants to see them all listed, I can do that, but I'd prefer you just
trust me on this one- I only have so many hours in the day ;)

 [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 ?

This seems like the better question for me to answer, since I've been
on the board before. Some of my primary goals in my last term were:

* marketing: I put together a liveCD, and wrote some of the press
releases. Could have done better on creating an infrastructure around
this, though once I left the board I helped encourage the current
liveCD work (thanks, rpath/foresight!)

* employee/fund management: I pushed hard to make Tim's role more
transparent, I think successfully, and some of our first published
financial data came out during that time.

* road map: with Dave Camp's help, I put together the first draft of
the road map, and maintained it for a while.

* GUADEC: I promised to get more involved in this, but did not, for a
variety of reasons.

 [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 ?

Actually pushing the work to non-board members is the best way to
bring new leaders into the fold, so I think the best thing the board
can do is aggressively delegate outside the board and work with those
folks to get them the skills, resources and contacts they need to
complete the tasks.

 [6] Some of the tasks of a Board Member are mundane administrative
 tasks, are you comfortable taking on such tasks as opposed to being
 always involved in strategic and visionary thinking ?

I've already volunteered to do the most mundane task of all-
secretary. So I think 'yes' :)

 [7] What or which according to you, is the one tipping point move
 for GNOME in the coming year ?

For better or for worse, much of the world's most interesting software
development is now being done on the web. This is a trend which shows
no signs of slowing or reversing. This tipping point has already
happened; the key question for us 

Re: Candidacy Announcement: Luis Villa

2007-11-16 Thread Luis Villa
After some discussion in IRC, I'd like to add a small clarification here.

The board has not just one but two outside counsels; the Software
Freedom Law Center (SFLC), and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich Rosati (WSGR).
I am not seeking to replace them- they are full of very capable
lawyers, who are available to us when we need them. I could not
replace, nor would I want to replace, these resources.

My purpose as a candidate is to be the bridge between those lawyers
and the Foundation. Historically, we've done a poor job of
communicating with and using the legal resources made available to us
by SFLC and WSGR, which has made dealing with some of our legal issues
much less efficient. For example, because of poor communication,
getting our trademark took many months- possibly more than a year-
longer than it should have. I'd like to resolve that problem, and
hopefully build relationships 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 this year. This will be an unusual
 candidacy. I will not be running to do various and sundry board tasks;
 I'll be running to do exactly one thing:

 * legal work- a vote for me is a vote that says 'Luis should be
 the coordinator of all GNOME-related legal issues.'

 I also will volunteer for two other things, but if someone else wants
 to do them it won't bother me:

 * secretarial services- I hate doing secretarial meeting bits, but
 this is often something organizations delegate to their lawyers, so
 I'd better get good at it.
 * occasional common sense- I stress occasional here because I
 don't have the time or the energy to get into petty politics with
 anyone, so if that happens, I'll pretty quickly retreat to
 lawyer-secretary.

 I will not do:

 * anything non-legal that goes beyond common-sense advice giving.

 Don't vote for me if:

 * you think someone else should be the central coordinator for the
 board's legal issues
 * you think board members should be jacks of all trades
 * you think it is crazy to hand legal issues over to a second-year
 law student (nb: you have to justify who should be doing it in that
 case :)

 Do vote for me if:

 * You think issues like copyright, trademark, patents, legal
 status of web services, relationships with outside counsel and
 partners, etc., are important to GNOME's future, and you'd like to see
 the board (led by me) be proactive in dealing with them.
 * you want someone on the board who is firmly committed to
 delegation and coordination.

 I will almost certainly serve one term and only one term. I expect to
 have less time once I graduate from school, and the 18 month term will
 almost perfectly coincide with the rest of my time in law school. In
 addition, if I'm successful in reaching my goals, by the end of the
 term I'll have built strong relationships with our outside counsel,
 and it will be less necessary to have a board member aggressively
 devoted to legal issues.

 Affiliations
 ===

 I am currently a student at Columbia Law School, and have no other
 formal affiliations at this time.

 For 12 weeks of this term I will be affiliated with a law firm which
 may do work for some of the parties- for example, one firm I am
 considering going to this summer does significant work for Sun, and
 another has done work representing parties negotiating with Red Hat.

 It seems unlikely that any substantial conflict will arise from that,
 but if so, I'll notify the rest of the board and recuse myself unless
 the board says otherwise.

 In the past I have been affiliated with Novell and Red Hat, and done
 contract work (through Ximian) for Sun. I maintain relationships with
 friends at all of those companies.

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


clarification and apology [was Re: board]

2007-11-08 Thread Luis Villa
On Nov 2, 2007 7:43 PM, Jeff Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 quote who=Luis Villa

  I volunteered to take leadership on this position months ago.

 We chose to have a Board member as liaison to the Legal team, which was very
 clearly delegated the responsibility to provide legal support and advice to
 the Foundation. This is the same model as other teams, but as the legal team
 is new and doesn't have a well-defined leadership/sustainability model (as,
 say, the release team does), it could do with a lot more shepherding. It was
 only clear to us very recently that the current liaison was not doing this
 effectively. The only reason it became clear to us is that our own goals
 were not being met, not as a result of feedback from the legal team itself.

After talking with Jeff some last night, I'd like to clarify this
exchange a bit, and offer some apologies for the impression I may have
created about the current board.

Since March of this year, I've been trying to help out on a variety of
miscellaneous Foundation-related legal projects- some important, some
not so much. All of these projects, for various reasons, stalled. When
I came back up to speed, I tried to revive them, but got blocked on
the two new legal-lists- in each case, I asked for status or for more
information, and got little information, or worse, complete silence.
As most of you know this is incredibly demotivating for a volunteer.

I thought that several board members were subscribed to these lists,
so I thought that my requests for information were being heard by (and
ignored by) the entire board. [I sincerely believed that I had checked
the membership lists; unless they've changed, I apparently did not.]
This frustrated me a great deal, and some of that has shown through in
the emails I sent to this list and to the board last week.

This was actually not the case. Very few board members were on the
lists, and the board expected the board's delegates to serve as a
conduit for this type of information. Unfortunately, for whatever
reasons, this did not happen, so the board as a whole was unaware of
my unanswered pings, and did not deserve some of the negative energy I
channeled in their direction.

To the extent I impugned the entire board last week, I deeply and
sincerely apologize; I let my frustration get the better of me and
failed to understand the complete picture. This was hurtful to some
old friends, and that particularly bothers me- I hope they will
understand where I was coming from and accept my apology, and
hopefully work with me to make sure that stalls like this one don't
happen again (at least on legal issues.)

As part of that, I am still very interested in being the board's point
person on legal issues for the next 18 months, and I still believe
that the best way to do that is to be elected. The dead air that
frustrated me as a volunteer, and which caused this unpleasant
episode, will not be a problem when I'm on the board, if there is
anything under the sun I can do to help it.

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


Re: OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]

2007-11-02 Thread Luis Villa
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 anyone actually thinks GNOME's presence one way or the other
(especially if messaged correctly) actually has an impact on it
becoming a formal standard. But I'm not holding my breath.

 Option 3 is useful only if we can veto (or organize a veto, or a stall) of
 the OOXML progress toward being a standard.  The current participation is
 not of that manner.

I agree that if GNOME is involved, GNOME should be taking every
opportunity to prevent ratification of the standard. (I agree that
Microsoft certainly appears not to have been bound by good faith in
the ratification process, so we should feel no reciprocal obligation.)

I'm certainly not an expert in ECMA/ISO processes- I'd much appreciate
it if Jody could explain what the situation is there. Where are we in
the process? What stands between the spec and ratification? If we stay
in the process, do we get a chance to vote against ratification? Or is
our presence a defacto stamp of approval?

 People can try to make it suck less but GNOME should not be involved in
 that, since that makes GNOME a pawn to weaken ODF.

No. Ratification may be a zero-sum game, and I agree we need to avoid
that as much as possible, but improving the spec that we will
inevitably have to use is not a zero-sum game.

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


Re: board [was Re: OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]]

2007-11-02 Thread Luis Villa
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. But frankly I have not felt like my attempts to help out have been
  invited, much less encouraged.

 I have personally tried, and certainly taken legal issues to legal-private
 as a matter of delegation (and only received one response, btw),

For what it is worth I have exactly zero mails from you to
legal-private in my archives; I see two that went to legal-list[1]
while I was moving and preparing for one of the more stressful weeks
of my life.[2] Given that Anne is the coordinator for the list, you
might ask her why it was not followed up on.

One of my goals if/when I become leader of the legal work will be to
ensure that every such thing is followed up on by *someone*, be it me,
one of our pro-bono counsels, or other interested volunteers. I
certainly don't want to do it all myself, nor am I qualified to do so,
but I will work my ass off to make sure that I don't block or squander
the work of others, and that if for some reason the work *can't* be
done, the board is at least told promptly of that.

 but I think
 there is an issue of... domain-specific responsibility... involved that has
 not created or encouraged an active team around legal work. That's a bummer,
 and I think the extreme business of other Board members has contributed to
 no one else picking up that ball.

I volunteered to take leadership on this position months ago. I knew I
was strapped, but I specifically said that if no one else could do it,
I could do it. The board turned me down, but yet, no one else has
apparently done it, and no one reached out to me to say 'hey, we
realize we screwed up and no one can do this, can you help out again?'
That was intensely frustrating to me.

Luis

[1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/legal-list/2007-August/msg8.html
[2] http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/08/14/back-in-new-york/
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]

2007-11-01 Thread Luis Villa
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 be:

1) pretend it doesn't exist and let Microsoft make it suck completely
for anyone who has to reimplement it- which will include us at some
point.

2) acknowledge it and at least attempt to make it suck less for
reimplementers, and allow our presence at ECMA to be used as a pawn to
weaken ODF.

3) acknowledge it and at least attempt to make it suck less for
reimplementers, but use our presence there to highlight Microsoft's
abusive, convicted monopolistic tendencies.

I'm very disappointed that we're currently headed towards #2, which,
IMHO, is probably worse than #1. But it shouldn't be that hard to push
towards #3- which really is the least bad of all the options.

Luis

 On 10/31/07, Behdad Esfahbod  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 10:19 +0100, BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
  
   I think that The GNOME participating in OOXML lends it a credibility
   it does not deserve. Joining ECMA TC45 would be like joining of the
   political party you dislike the most to improve their politics.
 
  To me, it's more like going to debates and challenging them.
 
 
   --
   mvh Björn
  --
  behdad
  http://behdad.org/
 
  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
  Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
  -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
 
 
 



 --
 Andy Tai, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


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


board [was Re: OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]]

2007-10-31 Thread Luis Villa
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 necessarily have prevented this particular problem, but
  I'd like to think I would have at least screamed very loud.

 That's rocking good news. More warm bodies on the Board with time to spare
 (or a very particular focus, plus the usual oversight and representation) is
 a very welcome thing, and it would be great to have you on the Board again.

 A related issue: I think we've pretty much shown that the seven person Board
 thing is a bit of a failure. Even if you're not elected or didn't run, we
 could appoint you to the Board for this function. :-) We ought to consider
 adding a couple of people to the Board.

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. But frankly I have not felt like my attempts to help out
have been invited, much less encouraged.

Or to put it another way- I'm running because delegation appears to
have failed, not because the 7-person board has failed.

 So much for being away for five years. :-)

I never said five, I said three. ;)

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


OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]

2007-10-29 Thread Luis Villa
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
   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 to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
   and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
   work on getting a press release for our membership.
  
   What would our purpose be there?
 
  As a non-profit we (GNOME) would not have voting privileges.
  The membership will serve as a mechanism to allow interested
  foundation members to join ECMA committees.  I'm advocating this in
  relation to ECMA376/TC45 aka MS OfficeOpen XML.  Committee members
  have the ability to request clarifications and suggest improvements
  in the text of the specification.  For anyone implementing parts of
  this format this is a golden chance to get enough documentation to
  facilitate interoperability.

 Seems reasonable.

 Of course, I'd be more comfortable with it if we put out a press
 release saying something to the effect of 'we see no way to avoid
 implementing OOXML without screwing our users, so we're joining ECMA
 to make sure it sucks as little as possible. All other things being
 equal, we'd much prefer to implement a spec that has a much better
 patent grant, was developed through a more public process, uses open
 standards like mathml, etc., but since MS has a dominant market
 position, we don't have much of a choice in the matter.'

So, uh... this apparently didn't happen, and now we're getting flamed
(rightfully) for appearing to give a stamp of approval to a deeply
flawed standard. So... when is the board making this happen?

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


Re: Suggestion for coming elections

2007-10-16 Thread Luis Villa
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 mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Can we improve things?

2007-09-12 Thread Luis Villa
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 important
 is central to having a healthy project where everyone wants to be
 involved.

+1.

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


Re: Foundation and Source Code Copyright

2007-08-07 Thread Luis Villa
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?
 

 IANAL and don't really know. If you made me guess, if your fix involves
 writing a few lines then that is copyrightable.

(IANALYet, TANSTAAFL(egalconsultation), YMMV, etc.)

Under US law, the contribution probably has to demonstrate some
modicum of creativity in order to have copyright. If the few lines
represent a creative solution to a problem, or a creative new feature
(unlikely in just a few lines), then it is copyrightable; if the few
lines are just an obvious 'oh, this has an off-by-one error'-type
patch, where no creativity is involved since the solution was obvious
once the problem was understood, then probably no copyright.

But YMMV by court, jurisdiction, country, etc. :)

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


Re: Foundation and Source Code Copyright

2007-08-03 Thread Luis Villa
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 things.
 Certainly no-one has done so so far, and since the mission of the
 foundation is more organisational than technical, the usefulness cound
 be questioned, but I think it's reasonable for the foundation to defend
 the copyrights of its members, and if certain members wis to assign
 their copyright, I wouldn't see any problem with that.

I don't see any conflict with the foundation's mission, but typically
copyright assignment requires execution of a contract, and on the
foundation side, obviously someone needs to keep tract of those
contracts and what code is owned by the foundation. To the best of my
knowledge the Foundation isn't prepared to do this ATM- we have no
assignment contract and no recordkeeping. (In practice, the Foundation
is also probably not prepared to go to court over its copyright, but I
suppose that could be remedied.)

I know that SFLC would be willing to help us formalize a contract and
a system if the board thinks it should be done.

  A couple of developers, including myself, have been working on a new
  capplet for the control center. Since we had been working on it as a
  group we decided it would be fairest to assign copyright to the
  foundation rather than any particular individual.

You can always jointly own copyright; if you look around CC I'm sure
you'll see lots of files that are (c) both jrb and chema, for example.

 While we have been discussing this issue, we also discovered that many
 of the source files in control center did not have copyright
 statements and those that did were probably out of date and did not
 include the names of all the contributors. Could the foundation advise
 us on what needs to be done and how we could rectify the situation as
 quickly as possible.

You probably don't *need* to do anything- the files are copyrighted by
the authors whether there is a copyright statement or not. But it
certainly wouldn't hurt to do a CVS history on the files in question
and add names and appropriate (L)GPL headers to the files.

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


Re: Foundation and Source Code Copyright

2007-08-03 Thread Luis Villa
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 do something wrong (for example,
   to relicense the package under a new license).
 
  Is this always something wrong? I guess sometimes making easier to change a
  license can be good (in terms of freedom, for example). All depends on how
  much you (want to) trust the copyright holder.

 Yeah, could be good if it was easier to say change Evo from GPLv2 to
 GPLv3+, but you either end up having many copyright holders anyway (all
 the people submitting non-trivial patches on bugzilla) or risk blocking
 development by bureaucracy of having to submit disclaimer or assignment
 forms first, like what Sun is doing with Java right now, or FSF with
 Emacs and some other projects.

But of course you have to weigh that risk (which is very real) with
the risk of someone finding a gigantic loophole in the existing
license and driving a truck through it. Not that any of *our*
contributors would do such a thing. Ahem. ;)

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


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

2007-06-10 Thread Luis Villa
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 to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
work on getting a press release for our membership.

What would our purpose be there?

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


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

2007-06-10 Thread Luis Villa
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 a representative
  for GNOME, and suggested it would also be good to get someone
  there from Abiword.
  
  ACTION: Behdad to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
  and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
  work on getting a press release for our membership.
 
  What would our purpose be there?

 As a non-profit we (GNOME) would not have voting privileges.
 The membership will serve as a mechanism to allow interested
 foundation members to join ECMA committees.  I'm advocating this in
 relation to ECMA376/TC45 aka MS OfficeOpen XML.  Committee members
 have the ability to request clarifications and suggest improvements
 in the text of the specification.  For anyone implementing parts of
 this format this is a golden chance to get enough documentation to
 facilitate interoperability.

Seems reasonable.

Of course, I'd be more comfortable with it if we put out a press
release saying something to the effect of 'we see no way to avoid
implementing OOXML without screwing our users, so we're joining ECMA
to make sure it sucks as little as possible. All other things being
equal, we'd much prefer to implement a spec that has a much better
patent grant, was developed through a more public process, uses open
standards like mathml, etc., but since MS has a dominant market
position, we don't have much of a choice in the matter.'

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


Re: Call for invitations to be the host of GUADEC 2008

2007-03-24 Thread Luis Villa
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 would rock.)
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Call for invitations to be the host of GUADEC 2008

2007-03-24 Thread Luis Villa
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 however you call it,
 as long as we point same land place, some languages still uses
 Constantinople name I guess. Though officially this city is called
 Istanbul as one of most beautiful cities in the World. (even though lots
 of corruption due to migration).

I believe Elliot was making a reference to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Not_Constantinople

Moral of the story: always footnote your non-cross-cultural jokes ;)

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


Re: an open-audit voting system for GNOME elections

2007-03-12 Thread Luis Villa
While I can't speak directly to the code involved, I want to say that
I'm excited by Ben's involvement- I worked with him when I was at
Harvard and he is a great guy, doing very interesting thinking. We're
lucky to have him involved, and with luck, I look forward to voting
with Helios in the next election.

Luis

On 3/12/07, Ben Adida [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi all,

 My name is Ben Adida, I'm a postdoc fellow at Harvard working on crypto
 and public policy. I spend a bunch of my time on voting systems, in
 particular those that let you or anyone audit the process from end to
 end. If you haven't encountered these systems before, they're
 significantly more powerful than your average voting system, with or
 without a paper trail.

 I'm currently implementing Helios, a voting system with this open-audit
 property. Last week, I was on the GNOME MC irc, where I collected
 requirements for the GNOME election and explained Helios in a bit more
 detail. If the system is eventually good enough, the goal is to have
 GNOME and potentially other free software groups use it in elections and
 referenda.

 I've started a publicly accessible and CC-licensed wiki:

 http://helios.stikipad.com/

 I will keep this wiki updated with the full design and, more
 importantly, pointers to partial demos as they become stable enough. Of
 course the whole codebase will be free/open-source: I will move it to a
 public source repository as soon as it's in decent v0.1 shape (2-3 months).

 Your thoughts/comments/questions/criticisms are welcome, either on the
 wiki as public comment, or to me personally.


 -Ben Adida
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://ben.adida.net
 http://benlog.com
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

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


Re: Endorsement for Joachim Norieko

2006-11-28 Thread Luis Villa
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 bridge (or worse, teach) should he be elected.

 I don't doubt Joachim's involvement in GNOME for a moment, particularly with
 your strong endorsement, but I'm concerned that critical differences in our
 shared values and vision would impair the Board's ability to execute in the
 next year [1].

 Perhaps Joachim could explain some of his comments. :-)

Perhaps you could explain which ones you mean, Jeff?
Luis
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Women in GNOME (Was: Code Of Conduct)

2006-06-01 Thread Luis Villa

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 changes.

 I know that the Computer Science Department at the University of
 Gothenburg in Sweden has a gender action plan:
 http://www.informatik.gu.se/dokument/dokument.xsp?group=jamstalldhetmenu=org

 I think that many other universities and even GNOME and Ubuntu could get
 a lot of inspiration here. (Provided it gets translated from Swedish
 into a language you understand.)
[snip]

Realistically, this plans needs to be written by you. Others will help you
with it, but you need to create it and drive it.


Such a plan should be written by someone who has actually been
involved in IRC, our mailing lists, bugzilla, etc., *as a developer*-
which, sorry, isn't Anne. It will not work if it is not driven by
someone with such experience.

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


Re: Women in GNOME (Was: Code Of Conduct)

2006-06-01 Thread Luis Villa

On 6/1/06, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On 6/1/06, Anne Østergaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 tor, 01 06 2006 kl. 09:05 -0400, skrev Luis Villa:
  On 6/1/06, Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
   Hi,
  
   Luis Villa wrote:
Such a plan should be written by someone who has actually been
involved in IRC, our mailing lists, bugzilla, etc., *as a developer*-
which, sorry, isn't Anne. It will not work if it is not driven by
someone with such experience.
  
   That's not so. There's nothing preventing someone who isn't a developer
   from comping up with a credible strategy for getting more women involved
   in GNOME (although that's totally off-topic to the code of conduct
   discussion). Any such plan would have to appeal to geek women - so who's
   better placed to come up with a plan? A male geek or a female non-geek?
 
  A female geek?

 I would like to hear your definition of a geek, please.

For the purposes of this discussion, 'someone actively involved in the
development of our software through the traditional means used by our
community'. This need not be direct software development (as everyone
knows I do very little of that) but it does mean involvement in
creating the product that we ship, and it does mean at least some
participation in the mainstream of the community- desktop-devel-list,
#gnome-hackers, etc.


And I might add that the reason this is important is that it seems to
me insane that someone could devise policy to get people involved in
something they have not themselves participated in.

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


Re: Code Of Conduct

2006-06-01 Thread Luis Villa

On 6/1/06, Telsa Gwynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Ar Tue, May 30, 2006 at 01:04:43PM +0200, ysgrifennodd Murray Cumming:
 I don't think we need a whole organisation to police it. At the least, it
 should just be how we expect people to behave on mailing lists and IRC and
 it could be up to the administrator of that list or channel to decide
 whether somone's conduct is unacceptable. But maybe some people would be
 reassured by the existence of some group that they could go to in extreme
 circumstances.

 Here's a simple start:
 http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct

 What do you think? What else would you like to see there?

I think this is a long-overdue thing to do.

I also think that there is no fun being part of a community which is
actually arguing the toss on whether we think people should be courteous
to each other within this community is a good thing or not.


I don't think anyone is arguing against being courteous; I'm certainly
not. I just think we'd be better off focusing on actually making
people more courteous, instead of writing rules about it.

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


Re: Code Of Conduct

2006-05-30 Thread Luis Villa

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.

Luis

On 5/30/06, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I would like GNOME to have a code of conduct to:

1.
Make it easier to stop aggressive or rude behaviour. This discourages new
contributors, though I think we are pretty good compared to some less
user-centric F/OSS communities.

2.
Advertise to the world that we are already a pleasant welcoming community.

I think this is a big part of Ubuntu's success at getting new
contributors. But I'd like our code of conduct to be a little shorter and
I don't think we need a whole organisation to police it. At the least, it
should just be how we expect people to behave on mailing lists and IRC and
it could be up to the administrator of that list or channel to decide
whether somone's conduct is unacceptable. But maybe some people would be
reassured by the existence of some group that they could go to in extreme
circumstances.

Here's a simple start:
http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct

What do you think? What else would you like to see there?


Murray Cumming
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com

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


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


Re: Notes from the Desktop Architects Meeting

2006-05-16 Thread Luis Villa

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 people wanted to make a joint GNOME/KDE
  statement about the project (we love it). Is this something we
  want to do?

I personally have issues with it because I can't get over the fact that
Portland is building on 'unstable or draft' specifications. Build the
bricks, *then* build the wall. I guess others have difficulties that
we're not encouraging our own toolkit APIs.


I have issues with the wheel reconstruction I see in Portland. I'd
much rather put the effort into making one mediocre platform really
good, instead of spending a lot of time and developer cycles making
two mediocre platforms work more like each other and still be
mediocre, but now mediocre and integrated at a shallow level.*

Luis

* Re: portland and also ffox/ooo, I'm disappointed that overall we're
settling for shitty levels of integration when everyone keeps voting
with their feet for an OS whose primary benefit is superior
integration.
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation

2006-05-15 Thread Luis Villa

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 reconsider that decision and
 post its documents in open formats as well.

I can certainly post a copy in ODT later in the week which gets converted into
.doc every time we need to go to the lawyers... I won't always have the time to
do it promptly, though.

I will note that there are several high-quality free software programmes that
can read and write the bits of the .doc format which are important for lawyers.


That doesn't make them open formats.

Luis (agreeing with Alan in general, sorry, Dave)
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Minutes of the Board meeting, 2006/Mar/01

2006-04-17 Thread Luis Villa
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 that out of a later version, but I think that slipped
through the cracks. 'We'- I use the term loosely, basically it is
inkscape, though the librvg folks are also aware/involved- are now
represented on the W3C SVG working group. It wasn't really
press-release worthy, so we canned that.

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


  1   2   >