Re: Board of Directors Candidacy - Thibault Martin

[Seif Lotfy via foundation-list]

unsubscribe

On Wed, 26 May 2021 at 12:46, Thibault Martin 
wrote:

> Hello GNOME Foundation,
>
> I am announcing my candidacy for the GNOME Foundation Board of Directors.
> You will find below the key points of who am I in the GNOME Community and
> what I would like to help with. For the full length wall of text, please
> have a look at the blog post announcing my candidacy
> 
> .
>
> Like many, I started my involvement in the GNOME community as an end-user.
> I eventually started helping with translations. For this activity I have
> regularily been chasing maintainers for string freezes, or to ask for
> explanations when strings didn’t make sense for me.
>
> This helped me to *blend in, meet the more general community, and finally
> take interest in higher level issues* such as our infamous chat platforms
> split
> ,
> or co-organising the GSoC 2021. I have a very strong interest in people,
> groups of them, ethics, how software impacts them all and how proper
> governance can help to achieve goals.
>
> As a member of the board, I would focus on our internal and external
> communication, where we have a lot of room for improvement. *Attracting
> new contributors is essential*: our public face and the messages we send
> must resonate with their values. Once they are here, the bottleneck for
> their contributions must be removed: what they can do and where to do it
> must be clear, how to do it as well. While getting new recruits is
> extremely important for a project to stay in good shape, *sustainability
> cannot be achieved without taking care of long time contributors*.
>
> I am strongly biased towards *think for a bit but start doing quickly,
> ask around how it impacted others, and adapt* rather than overthinking. I
> believe KPIs are necessarily biased and get circumvented all the time. *Human
> interactions is how you measure success*.
>
> As the head of digital identity of a large organisation, I am experienced
> in projects aiming to lower the friction for customer onboarding. Quite
> counter-intuitively, many parallels can be drawn between corporate
> customers and non-profit contributors.
>
> Open-source software communities used to despise designers and thought
> they knew better. Now we welcome them and see the positive impact they
> have. A second mentality change needs happen: *we must allow the persons
> who are good at hyping others to help*.
>
> Regards,
> Thib
> ___
> foundation-announce mailing list
> foundation-annou...@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-announce
>
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Change in affiliation

[Seif Lotfy]

For some reason this was in drafts and not sent out.
November was my last month with Collabora. Thus no affiliation
Cheers
Seif
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Questions about the new GNOME Forums

[Seif Lotfy]

While I do agree with some of your concerns, I do understand the need
of such a new communciation platform:
Google has been around and seems like it did not help us communication
with the community.

IMHO need either one or both of:
1) a central location for communication and people helping each other
==> see ubuntuforums
2) a stackexchange like askubuntu which is also very popular.

Those two proved successful building a strong community behind Ubuntu.

So the requirement here would be having some gnome community members
to participate. And I think it is a very nice communication platform
since IRC and mailinglist have failed us.

I for one am a fan of stackexchange. But I think we should support the
idea of the forum for a while to see how it goes. Stackexchange is not
dialog friendly as a forum.

Cheers
Seif



On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:48 PM, William Jon McCann
 wrote:
> Hi Karen,
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Karen Sandler  wrote:
> ...
>>
>> I think newcomer users really expect to get information in the forum
>> format, so I think it could be very useful. I guess we'll see what happens
>> there in the meantime :)
>
>
> But perhaps more will get information from google.
>
> I think it is important to make high quality, trustworthy information
> available to search engines. It isn't clear to me at all that forums
> accomplish this without a *lot* of moderation. Which in itself can come
> across as heavy handed.
>
> Availability of this kind of information starts a virtuous cycle. While
> disseminating lower quality information can easily create an overload that
> makes things hard to correct later.
>
> Have we considered using something like Stack Exchange instead? Anyone have
> experience with it?
>
> Thanks,
> Jon
>
> ___
> 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: GNOME now

[Seif Lotfy]

I am loving the replies until now. But can we try to keep this
focused. Can we try to answer the three questions with three short
answers.

[1] Where’s the product going?
[2] What problem are we trying to solve?
[3] How are we going to do that?

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Debarshi Ray  wrote:
>> What you say is not a vision. That's a "what", not a "why". Also, are we in
>> the same business as Apple? Apple is in the business of challenging the
>> status quo and thinking differently. ($:04 in the video) Are we?
>> WHY are we doing GNOME?
>
> We are in the business of challenging the status quo in free software.
>
> Happy hacking,
> Debarshi
>
> --
> There are two hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming
> things and off-by-one errors.
>
> ___
> 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: GNOME now

[Seif Lotfy]

Good points Brian :)
I like the last part "this advanced UNIX-hacker type does not seem to
be the primary user GNOME is focusing on anymore."
May I ask you however to try to reply to each question with one
sentence if possible so I can create a small overview able chart
later?
Cheers
Seif

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Brian Cameron  wrote:
>
> I think one of the most significant challenges for any free desktop
> that is trying to reach the "average user" is how to deal with the fact
> that most people like using computers, tablets, smartphones, etc. to
> interact with non-free multimedia.  Not just viewing movies and
> listening to music, but also creating content in increasingly
> collaborative ways.  Tools that use non-free technologies like Skype or
> Vonage are not just popular, but a requirement for many people who pay
> for such services.  How many average people would purchase a device
> that did not support such tools?
>
> Proprietary companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft coordinate
> sophisticated agreements with media companies and often go along with
> nasty DRM agreements required by those who own the rights to popular
> media.  Even some popular artists, like The Beatles, are very
> controlling about who can access the media they control.  If you avoid
> DRM, you probably have to avoid such popular artists - including pretty
> much anything released on a DVD.
>
> In certain markets, not being able to access non-free media may not
> be a problem.  The device the FedEx employee uses to collect signatures
> or a Point-of-Sale system might be good examples of devices that
> do not need much media support.  Such markets might be an ideal focus
> for a free desktop environment that, perhaps naturally, lacks
> strong DRM support.
>
> But, if the "average user" is the target, how does GNOME plan to
> provide access to non-free multimedia that the average user tends to
> access and create?  Is the community working to make GNOME attractive
> to some big company that can negotiate the expensive licenses needed to
> provide access?  Or is GNOME focusing on users who do not have an
> interest in using, accessing or creating non-free media?  Is GNOME
> just waiting until relevant patents expire and these issue hopefully
> just go away?
>
> I always thought that GNOME more appealed to hacker types because
> hackers tend to be more agreeable to figuring out how to work in a
> DRM-free environment.  For example, a hacker would likely be more
> willing to rip their audio in OGG format.  But this advanced
> UNIX-hacker type does not seem to be the primary user GNOME is focusing
> on anymore.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> On 11/14/12 11:08 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Seif Lotfy > <mailto:s...@lotfy.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Quoting Stormy Peters comment on a recent blog post concerning GNOME:
>> " We haven’t shared our vision or our roadmap for the future. Where’s
>> the product going? What problem are we trying to solve? How are we
>> going to do that?"
>>
>> Good question.
>> As a member of the board of directors I can't really answer this
>> question at the moment either, without having to organize my thoughts.
>> So many different point of views and ideas in the community that are
>> not well discussed. The first thing that pops up in my head is GNOME
>> OS. But then I am kinda lost. Maybe this is something we need to
>> discuss here on the mailing list.
>> Lets try to answer those 3 questions. What about one sentence per
>> question for a start?
>> I am avoiding a blog post since I am not sure its the best way to
>> reach most of our contributors.
>>
>>
>> For me, it's our byline right?  A distraction free desktop.  Our designs
>> are all based on being able to write a desktop that allows us to get our
>> work done, multi-task with whatever interruptions that we have in our
>> daily life.
>>
>> Where are we going?  Are you talking about development or user land?
>>
>> What do other people think?
>>
>> sri
>>
>> Cheers
>> Seif
>> ___
>> foundation-list mailing list
>> foundation-list@gnome.org <mailto: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
>
>
> ___
> 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

GNOME now

[Seif Lotfy]

Quoting Stormy Peters comment on a recent blog post concerning GNOME:
" We haven’t shared our vision or our roadmap for the future. Where’s
the product going? What problem are we trying to solve? How are we
going to do that?"

Good question.
As a member of the board of directors I can't really answer this
question at the moment either, without having to organize my thoughts.
So many different point of views and ideas in the community that are
not well discussed. The first thing that pops up in my head is GNOME
OS. But then I am kinda lost. Maybe this is something we need to
discuss here on the mailing list.
Lets try to answer those 3 questions. What about one sentence per
question for a start?
I am avoiding a blog post since I am not sure its the best way to
reach most of our contributors.

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

Re: Looking for community managers or enthusiasts!

[Seif Lotfy]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Bastien Nocera  wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 11:50 +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
> > On 11/14/2012 11:38 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 16:07 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> > >> I'm looking for some talented folks who can help us engage with the
> > >> press, on blogs, on mailing lists and explain our vision.
> > >
> > > I hope it's slightly better handled than Emily last 2 posts, which
> > > managed to say that the removal of fallback was badly communicated (!)
> > > without details of what was done wrong, and used a blog post by a troll
> > > to make false assertions about GTK+ 3.x's API stability.
> > >
> > > You might want to vouch for your community managers before you let them
> > > loose...
> >
> > Really? Your solution to "we have a PR problem" is "criticise the only
> > people trying to address that problem by publicly saying they suck at
> it"?
>
> Telling X you'll teach them how to communicate with Y and then creating
> a problem with X because of the way you communicated with Y.
>
> Tell me how exactly I should have brought this up "privately". We have
> very few private mailing-lists in GNOME, and it wasn't discussed on any
> of those I would be on [1].
>

Maybe a private IRC discussion?

> Sheesh.
>
> Yeah, me too.
>
> [1]: Not a cabal, it's Board-related lists.
>
> ___
> 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: Questions for the board election candidates

[Seif Lotfy]

Hello,

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Robert Nordan  wrote:
>
> Hi all, I have a few questions for the candidates in the upcoming
> election to the board. They are obviously shaped by my interests, but I
> believe that other Foundation members may be interested in the answers
> as well.
>
> 1) "Open Source" or "Free Software"?
>
> This is about personal philosophy: Do you prefer the pragmatism of the
> Open Source Initiative or the political idealism of the Free Software
> Foundation? (Some of the candidates have already flagged a stance on
> this.)

We need idealism as well as pragmatism. For me the pragmatism of the
Open Source Initiative is more of a political negotiation mindset that
makes way for the ideal goal which is Free Software. Personally I use
the term FLOSS a lot or open-source, and like many other I pick my
battles.

> 2) Overhaul of GNOME's git infrastructure
>
> I personally believe that the way the GNOME git system is set up is a
> bit antiquated and doesn't use git to its full potential. It's fine for
> developers with commit access, but  contributors without have to create
> individual patches and attach them to bug trackers or convince the
> maintainers to look up their personal branch hosted somewhere else and
> merge in. In a time when GitHub is setting the standard for ease of use
> when it comes to forking, merging and development, GNOME is lagging
> behind.
>
> I have heard chatter among GNOME people about setting up a GNOME
> instance of Gitorious to gain that kind of functionality, but nothing
> has really happened. Do any of the candidates want to make a juicy
> campaign promise on this issue?

I can only agree with you here, that the GNOME infrastructure is not
really contributor friendly. But unlike gitorious and github we are do
not want to allow people to willy-nilly host their projects without
any affiliation to GNOME. The only thing we could take from github or
gitorious is maybe the user experience. Creating accounts should be
administrated.
Nevertheless I think setting up github or gitorious for GNOME with a
administered user registration is a good way forward. However  setting
this up would take a lot of time and resources. If anyone is up for
that I don't think the board wouldn't back up the initiative.

>
> 3) GNOME and Ubuntu
>
> In the recent years there has been a public perception of a schism
> between GNOME and Ubuntu resulting in double work and wasted resources
> on both sides. Do you think that perception is unfounded or not, and how
> do you plan to handle it?

Well I don't think it is wasted resources. GNOME and Ubuntu are (in
their own rights) both providing their own different UX. To provide a
UX you need libraries and services, and that is where I think GNOME
and Ubuntu share common ground, since Ubuntu uses services (as well as
applications) developed by GNOME.

On a side note, in my opinion, some competition on a UX level is healthy.

> 4) Stance on GNOME forks
>
> Similarly, GNOME 3 has met with some opposing developments like Cinnamon
> and MATE. It is of course the right of dissatisfied users to do what
> they want and fork if they like, but should GNOME ignore them or try to
> find ways to work together with them?

Well I am not sure how GNOME can work with MATE really since most of
us are focused on GNOME 3. We are trying to move forward and not
backwards. I however admire the initiative but I am not sure how we
can work together.
Cinnamon on the other hand, I see as a parallel development to GNOME
3, since it is nothing else but a different Shell, using the same
technologies. Here I see a lot of room for working together. And it
obvious that they have their own fan club. Instead of looking at them
as opposing development we should approach them and try to look at
some of the good efforts they have done. I am not sure how to start,
maybe by inviting Clem to GUADEC or so. There is lots of room for
collaboration.

Cheers
Seif

>
> --
> Robert Nordan 
>
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: A question for the candidates

[Seif Lotfy]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Allan Day  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks to all the candidates for stepping forward. It's fantastic that
> you are interested in doing this important work.
>
> A question for you:
>
> Sometimes it can feel like the Board of Directors is a bit divorced
> from the rest of the GNOME project. Is this a problem, in your view?
> If it is, what do you think can be done about it?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Allan
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>

Hi Allan,

Thanks for the great question.
Before I give you an answer, I would like to empathize what great work the
board has been doing in the last years. From raising funds and our
financial capital to organizing hackfests and events, as well as pushing
for programs to get more contributors to GNOME, all this requires a big
amount of dedication and discipline. So I think a divorce from the project
is not the right description.

That being said, I understand where you are coming from. From a personal
point of view it seems to me that the board is so focused on *increasing*
our financial and social capital, that sometimes *maintaining* the social
capital is neglected. This leads to the observation of some that the board
as an entity not directly involved with the community and community
problems. To put it similar words to yours: It feels sometimes, that they
are divorced from the community (not from the project)

The board has been helping the community increase its social capital.
Getting new contributors takes time and effort to get them integrated, this
is where initiatives like OWP help alot.
But the board needs to focus a bit of its time and efforts on *keeping* new
and old contributors in the GNOME. This starts with the board getting
involved in community related issues and help fascilitate solutions to
ongoing disagreement. The board has been voted by the community, so I think
they represent a subset of the community that we trust.

Take the mailing-list from the last month. While some board members jumped
in to help solve the disagreements, I think it could have been solved much
quicker if the board had a meeting discussing the problem internally and
studying a way to solve the issue at hand.
As Bastien said before, it is not the board's responsibility to decide on
technical issues, or what application gets in or not. However I think the
board should step in when things seem to be rough and help *detect the
source of disturbance in the force*. By stepping in I mean, suggest having
a meeting, and then getting the parties involved to make a *clear* plan on
how the problem can be solved.

Ofcourse this can't be a long term responsibilty of the board. This is why
if I am elected, I will push for the formation of a community task force,
that would work on solving ongoing issues and negotiate between the parties
involved, as well as maintain a healthy communication atomsphere within the
community.
KDE already does this pretty successfully with its community working group.
This group is a point of contact for any community problem that might arise
in KDE. They've helped solve quite a few problems, among them the split of
KOffice and Calligra. Thanks to them they managed to keep both parties
inside KDE and the bad press around it was kept to a minimum. It took quite
some time but they managed to find a solution that worked for the whole
community without too much damage.

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

Apologies to GNOME

[Seif Lotfy]

It has been a very bumpy road for Zeitgeist with GNOME. I really don't
feel like going into details and history since this won't help us
proceed. I admit my part of the problem.

While I might not be the best developer around I do try to bring
something new to the table and I do hope that GNOME can see it at some
point. What started off as a GNOME project is now being endorsed by
Unity, KDE and lots of small community projects. We worked on being a
cross-desktop project with our roots in GNOME. I am not going to
debate what needs to be changed in Zeitgeist to be more GNOME friendly
(moving to git etc...) since its not fair for other deployments and
not fair for us as developers who are used to our work environment.
And while I might be the face of Zeitgeist the project has outgrown me
and we have lots hackers and contributors around, so please feel free
to get to know them.

So to sum it up:

"Sorry we've disagreed about things or I've come across badly in the
past. I didn't mean to be impolite. just want to help bring some cool
features to GNOME and GNOME Shell. I hope we can have a clean start
and try and get along well from here"

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

Re: Some notes on GNOME Shell

[Seif Lotfy]

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Vincent Untz  wrote:

> Le jeudi 03 juin 2010, à 01:13 -0400, Sergey Panov a écrit :
> > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 20:45 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Sergey Panov  wrote:
> > > > I sense a suspicion from the outsiders (not RedHat employees) that
> > > > project is not just manned by the RedHat employees, but controlled by
> > > > the company
> > >
> > > It's controlled by the people doing the work, like any other project.
> > >
> > > What does it mean to be "controlled by the company"?  It sounds a bit
> > > far-fetched.
> >
> > I was not speaking for myself, I still hope RedHat is an unusual
> > company. But I can see how people can project their own experiences in
> > the corporate environment on inner workings of RedHat. In other
> > companies, the lead engineers are interacting with FOSS communities
> > directly, but the "dark cardinals"(aka managers) control development
> > behind the scene.
>
> Let me try to address the suspicion you're highlighting here, with a few
> examples we could have if we follow the same kind of rationale:
>
>  - empathy is controlled by Collabora
>  - gnome-panel is controlled by Novell
>  - gobject-introspection is controlled by Litl. Or Red Hat now. Or both.
>  - orca is/was controlled by Sun/Oracle.
>  - etc.
>
> It's just the way maintainership works. We can always assume there are
> dark cardinals or whatever. Or we can see who are the people working on
> those projects and see if we trust them based on what they achieved in
> our community. I do trust Guillaume, Xavier, Johan, Colin, Willie and
> many other people from various companies. (I kind of trust myself too
> ;-))
>
> Now, why wouldn't we trust Owen and Jon for GNOME Shell?
>

We have to trust them there is no point in arguing here.


> And don't get me wrong -- I happen to disagree with some stuff they're
> doing from time to time. But it doesn't mean I should stop trusting
> them.
>

But would't you like to have the points you disagree with be discussed or
reevaluated?
I think this is the issue the community is facing. There is a difference
between "We are going to do it like that because we think its right, and
that is how it is gonna be" and "We are doing it like that because we think
it is right, but we are open for discussion"
Right now the Shell developers are somewhere between both stand points. I
know some developers who were able to cooperate with them. But I think
more transparency around discussions and evaluations are missing.


>
> Vincent
>
> --
> Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>

Cheers
Seif

-- 
This is me doing some advertisement for my blog http://seilo.geekyogre.com
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: A few questions for the candidates

[Seif Lotfy]

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Vincent Untz  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I originally wanted to have some questions included in the list of
> questions sent by the membership committee, but I feel like waiting for
> Friday while the voting period is already opened is waiting a long time
> and I'm not being patient here :-)
>
> I apologize because some of those questions are most likely a bit easier
> to answer for people who are already on the board...
>
> 1) I've read with interest the mails from the candidates announcing
>   they're running, and most (if not all -- I didn't double-check)
>   include some motivations with examples of what they'd be interested in
> working on.
>   Why are those tasks/ideas things you cannot work on while not being on
> the board?
>

Some of my points can be worked on without the board yet I missing the
overview in some areas and some others need official representatives from
companies or organizations. Being on board will ease the planning and and
organizing these meetings with set parties.


>
> 2) What are your non-usual (ie, not code, not translations, not
>   documentation, etc.) contributions as a GNOME Foundation member?
>   (organizing events, pushing people to do things, finding sponsors,
>   etc. are all possible answers)
>

If being a mentor for GSoC counts then yes. Else I only did coding.
(Does allowing Vincent to beat me in Mario Kart to boost his ego count?)


> 3) What is your opinion on the co-location of Akademy and GUADEC in
>   2011? And if you think it was not the best choice, will you still be
>   able to help it happen?
>

I am actually for it since it motivates and pushes for cross-desktop
development and communication.


>
> 4) How much free time per week do you think you will be able to allocate
>   for the board? (I'm very well aware that this could be 0 for some
>   weeks, and 100% of your time for other weeks; I'm just asking in
>   general)
>

to be very honest i think 10 - 20 hours per week at maximum...


> 5) Are you okay giving up some of your current GNOME
>   responsabilities/activities to join the board? (give up a maintainer
>   hat, or hack less, or participate less in a specific team) Or do you
>   think it won't be necessary and why?
>   (I know it's a bit related to the previous question :-))
>

I don't think I will be giving away responsibilities or activities since
most of the work I did or do is caught up by my team and maintained by
them... So my role with them is more or less organizational than coding. I
just chip in now and then with some prototypes and bugs for them to look at
and take in if they like.
I plan to do the same thing if elected for board, by motivating community
members to take actions and drive them into solving issues.


> 6) Will you be interested in being treasurer, president or secretary if
>   elected? If yes, which role and why?
>

No not really, since I would rather observe people taking over these roles
first and learn from their experience


>
> 7) What do you think of the current GNOME Foundation budget? Had you read
> it at least once before reading this mail?
>   (it's okay if you didn't look at it before, btw)
>

I read it a week ago before deciding to run for candidacy (someone tipped me
to do so)  and while I am very surprised by the income and outcome, there
should be a security buffer of 20% at least... This is a point I think
should be discussed by the board and community.

8) What do you think our next fundraising campaign should be about?
>   (I'd love to not read 11 times the same answer, thanks :-))
>

Help your app:
 By donating money to your favorite app you get   your name mentioned in a
new "Thank you" tab in the "About" dialog of an app.


> 9) Will you be at GUADEC this year? (there's a board meeting and an
>   advisory board meeting there)
>

Yes


>
> 10) Make or break question: what's your favorite french expresision?
>

The french bits of the "Les Poissons" song from the "Little Mermaid"


> Thanks,
>
> Vincent
>
> --
> Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
> ___
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>

Je vous en prie,

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

Re: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

[Seif Lotfy]

Dear Iain,

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Iain  wrote:

> > > >Bring up and fix issues with GNOME that are being ignored or shunned.
> > > Can you list these?
> > I will just be frank here...
> > Translation shifting from upstream to downstream ?
> > Development infrastructure limiting upstream contribution.
> > Canonical's Unity development, what does it mean for GNOME ?
> > Red Hat's control over GNOME Shell ?
> > Meego being a competition or a GNOME sister project ?
> > Smaller companies involvement into GNOME decisions
> > How much of GNOME is community driven and how much is company driven
> > Is the GNOME community forced to assimilate with decisions made by those
> companies?
>
> > > >  Work on letting GNOME shell be lead by the community.
> > > Can you expand on what you want changed?
> > Currently all GNOME Shell decisions are taken by Red Hat, thus limiting
> the community's technical as well as design contribution.
>
> It seems to me that your underlying belief is that there is too much
> (large) corporate influence in GNOME. Would you say that you might
> have some conflict of interest here given that your project
> (Zeitgeist) was ignored/shunned by the GNOME Shell developers?
>

I am not singling out any one party, my concern is just that there are
larger parties who don't necessarily seem to be aligned in their technical
approaches. Zeitgeist is doing well downstream and Canonical seem very happy
with it, yet this is not my concern. My concern is for GNOME.

I don't think it is reasonable to get into a Shell / Zeitgeist discussion
here. Although there were some obstacles on the road we did manage to find
common ground with McCann's new designs and Owen's technical review. But I
won't deny that the experience was *also* a "motivating factor" for me. I
will use GNOME Shell however as an example of a corporate driven project:
• The community never intensively evaluated the development and the design.
• The community had very little to say in the decisions of the
aforementioned processes.
Just allowing the community to contribute code does not make it a community
project. Which also makes marketing GNOME 3 harder for the marketing team.


>
> > > > I stand for innovation in GNOME.
> > > What is lacking now, and what do want to do when being part of the
> board?
> > Recently GNOME has not been attracting many new developers. It is because
> its current development state doesn't allow any new innovation to settle in.
> GNOME being run mostly by people representing
> > bigger companies no risks are being taken and thinking out of the box is
> usually categorized as such.
>
> Surely one could argue that GNOME Shell is quite innovative thinking
> outside of the box, and that quite a large risk is being taken with
> it, and most of the suggestions for it that come from the community
> are of requests for uninnovative things; "I want a task bar", "I want
> applets"
> Or is there a potential conflict of interest here as well that
> Zeitgeist has not gained much traction in the community?
>
>
Again I decide not to get into GS vs ZG discussions here since its just
brings up flame-wars, beside the fact that they are not comparable since one
is a UI and the other is a service. But there is an impressive community
uptake for Zeitgeist if its of interest for you.
Sure GNOME Shell might be innovative in a a Usability perspective but it is
the same old desktop. What I meant to say is innovative technologies such as
for example semantic desktop technologies that allow new dimensions of User
Experience are not being deployed.


> > [Redhat or Ubuntu] could start off with a design board combining
>  selected and competent representatives from community and companies, whose
> first objective is to rewrite the HIG.
>  ...
> > I suggest starting a technical board with equal amounts of
>  representatives of companies as and community whose members are
> significantly competent for the roles.
> ...
> > Recently GNOME has not been attracting many new developers.
>
> Yet you think the solution to attracting new developers is to wrap the
> processes up in red tape and technical boards or design boards? Surely
> Free Software is supposed to be about meritocracy, not about boards
> dictating how an individual project should be run.



Well currently there is a GNOME Shell meritocracy among the RH employees.
How is that meritocracy for the community.
Yes I think the solution is setting up boards. It is not a Meritocracy as
soon as sole responsibilities are given to a group of individuals affiliated
with the same corporation.


> iain
>

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

Re: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

[Seif Lotfy]

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Johannes Schmid  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > AFAIK there  are quite a few standing issues with GNOME arabic
> > support.
> >
> > http://wiki.arabeyes.org/Gnome
> > http://wiki.arabeyes.org/%D8%AC%D9%86%D9%88%D9%85
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=420964
> >
> > These are slightly out of date though.
>
> Hmm, the bugs seem mostly fixed and I don't see what this has to do with
> upstream vs. downstream.
>
> > * Why do you think our infrastructure is limiting?
> >
> >
> > The development happening on Launchpad (not bazaar) really beats what
> > GNOME provides in several aspects, starting bug management,
> > blueprinting and linking with branches. There are a lot of nice
> > projects there that are not part of GNOME because of the GNOME
> > Infrastructure: GNOME Do, Docky, Getting Things GNOME... These
> > projects are in their own rights very successful and used by the
> > community. And by allowing them to deploy per default with GNOME would
> > just benefit the GNOME community...
> > The Project leads don't care since they are being deployed downstream
> > now which is more or less skipping the middle man which is GNOME, who
> > seem to be conservative in some of these aspects.
> > I am not saying we should switch to Lauchpad or so. But we need to
> > study and make an effort into compromising. Having major projects work
> > downstream will kill GNOME, and pointing fingers will not help.
>
> Well, I see your point while I disagree.
>
>
> > * For the company statements IMHO despite I don't know
> > anything about
> > the Unity plans I think those arent' true. Could you explain?
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not saying its true but sooner or later RH will want to deploy
> > GNOME Shell on the netbooks just like Unity will at some point put an
> > eye on the desktop... Its naive to asssume both will not try to assume
> > positions in the netbook and desktop market...
>
> It's getting off-topic but would it be wrong to say that one company is
> working upstream while the other company is working downstream? Wouldn't
> the point be to have everyone work upstream? Seems like the new board
> should participate in this discussion regardless who is in the new
> board.
>

I would love to have the whole community discuss this issue... please wait
for my next mail


>
> Regards,
> Johannes
>
>
>
Cheers
Seif
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

[Seif Lotfy]

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Johannes Schmid  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> >  I will just be frank here...
> > • Translation shifting from upstream to downstream ?
> > • Development infrastructure limiting upstream contribution.
> > • Canonical's Unity development, what does it mean for GNOME ?
> > • Red Hat's control over GNOME Shell ?
> > • Meego being a competition or a GNOME sister project ?
> > • Smaller companies involvement into GNOME decisions
> > • How much of GNOME is community driven and how much is company driven
> > • Is the GNOME community forced to assimilate with decisions made by
> > those companies?
> > • More...
>
> OK, you were asked to list them. Anyway, why do you think there are
> true?
>
> * From my point of view as part of the gtp coordination team I think
> translations are not shifting downstream, we rather solved most of these
> problems and have high-quality upstream translations.
>

AFAIK there  are quite a few standing issues with GNOME arabic support.

http://wiki.arabeyes.org/Gnome
http://wiki.arabeyes.org/%D8%AC%D9%86%D9%88%D9%85
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=420964

These are slightly out of date though.

* Why do you think our infrastructure is limiting?
>

The development happening on Launchpad (not bazaar) really beats what GNOME
provides in several aspects, starting bug management, blueprinting and
linking with branches. There are a lot of nice projects there that are not
part of GNOME because of the GNOME Infrastructure: GNOME Do, Docky, Getting
Things GNOME... These projects are in their own rights very successful and
used by the community. And by allowing them to deploy per default with GNOME
would just benefit the GNOME community...
The Project leads don't care since they are being deployed downstream now
which is more or less skipping the middle man which is GNOME, who seem to be
conservative in some of these aspects.
I am not saying we should switch to Lauchpad or so. But we need to study and
make an effort into compromising. Having major projects work downstream will
kill GNOME, and pointing fingers will not help.


> * For the company statements IMHO despite I don't know anything about
> the Unity plans I think those arent' true. Could you explain?
>
>
I am not saying its true but sooner or later RH will want to deploy GNOME
Shell on the netbooks just like Unity will at some point put an eye on the
desktop... Its naive to asssume both will not try to assume positions in the
netbook and desktop market...


> Thanks,
> Johannes
>
>
>


-- 
This is me doing some advertisement for my blog http://seilo.geekyogre.com
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

[Seif Lotfy]

Hi Olav,


> Hello Seif,
>
> Reading your motivation I think I understand what you mean, but would
> like to know for sure. As such, I'd appreciate if you could expand some
> more on your motivation. Further, though I think I understand, I'm
> purposely asking very open ended questions (to avoid suggestive ones).
>
> My goal is not to have a discussion on this with you or others, purely
> to better understand your motivation.
>
>
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:59:35AM +0200, Seif Lotfy wrote:
> > Motivation:
> >
> >  My reasons for running for GNOME board are as follows:
>
>
> >  • Encourage more cooperation on design between RH and Canonical.
>
> What do you mean concretely (design of what)? Why RH and Canonical
> specifically?
>

 I left out Intel, Nokia, Novell and others because their main focus now is
on Meego which on a design level I do not consider a GNOME project.
Currently RH and Canonical both have started their own design & user
experience to improve the usability of GNOME. Both however seem to be
heading to the same goal but with different designs that could on a shallow
level end up leaving GNOME in an diverging state (Shell vs Unity). Both
should start cooperating on the design level. One could start off with a
design board combining  selected and competent representatives from
community and companies, whose first objective is to rewrite the HIG.


>
> >  • Avoid fragmentation by helping to build consensus around a unified
> > vision for GNOME's future to prevent a GNOME divergence into 2.30 -and
> > GNOME 3 base.
>
> What do you think is lacking now?
>

What is lacking is a vision of what GNOME 3 should be. Where is it heading?
Who is the target of the GNOME 3 desktop? How is the current GNOME accepted
by the community. There seems to be some disagreements on several issues
concerning design and technical aspects, which are leading to frictions
between upstream and downstream development.

>
> >  • Bring up and fix issues with GNOME that are being ignored or
> > shunned.
>
> Can you list these?
>

 I will just be frank here...
• Translation shifting from upstream to downstream ?
• Development infrastructure limiting upstream contribution.
• Canonical's Unity development, what does it mean for GNOME ?
• Red Hat's control over GNOME Shell ?
• Meego being a competition or a GNOME sister project ?
• Smaller companies involvement into GNOME decisions
• How much of GNOME is community driven and how much is company driven
• Is the GNOME community forced to assimilate with decisions made by those
companies?
• More...


> >  • Work on letting GNOME shell be lead by the community.
>
> Can you expand on what you want changed?
>

Currently all GNOME Shell decisions are taken by Red Hat, thus limiting the
community's technical as well as design contribution. I suggest starting a
technical board with equal amounts of  representatives of companies as and
community whose members are significantly competent for the roles. Those
should drive the technical development of GNOME Shell forward.


>
> >  • I stand for innovation in GNOME.
>
> What is lacking now, and what do want to do when being part of the
> board?
>

Recently GNOME has not been attracting many new developers. It is because
its current development state doesn't allow any new innovation to settle in.
GNOME being run mostly by people representing bigger companies no risks are
being taken and thinking out of the box is usually categorized as such.
While understandable it leaves GNOME in a state where a lot of
functionalities are desired but not deployable. Innovations are usually
brought up by smaller companies such as Collabora, Codethink, Landeo, Igalia
and others. We should allow them more responsibilities in decision taking
when it comes to GNOME's emerging technologies.

>
> > Don't hesitate to ask me questions when the lines are open.
>
> done
>

Hope I answered your questions.


>
> --
> Regards,
> Olav
> ___
> 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