On Sep 17, 2014 9:17 AM, "Bastien Nocera" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 13:58 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 09:51:15AM +0100, Ekaterina Gerasimova wrote:
> > > The approach to budgeting is similar in that the Foundation and Google
> > > both have a budget, but our b
If you need some help with things like ordering breakfast and coffee or
booking Flattop Johnny's for an after party let me know. I'll most likely
stop by to say hi. I just started at Google but I can see if they would
like to sponsor something. No promises though.
--
J5
On Jul 22, 2014 9:00 AM, "C
support 35-50 people.
>
> sri
>
>
>> Meg
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Jared L Jennings <
>> jaredljenni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>> Jared Jennings
>>> jaredljenni...@gmail.com
>>>
>
Just a suggestion, perhaps the next year's location should be bid on and
announced during the current year's summit like GUADEC is. That would make
it much easier to plan for budgets, etc.
--
J5
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:10 PM,
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> I think Tobias's message missed out some context, so I'll try to fill in from
> what I've been hearing as a foundation member. Note that I'm not on the board
> right now and have not been for over two years, and this is my personal
> unders
Hi Richard,
Henry Holtzman at the Media Lab and Walter Bender has helped us in the
past. They have work with the registrar's office at
http://web.mit.edu/registrar/www/schedules/ though that link seems
outdated. This one seems to be the correct one -
http://web.mit.edu/registrar/classrooms/rese
2011/12/16 Máirín Duffy :
> On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 10:39 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
>> Thanks so much for offering to look into this, Richard! I hear that the
>> Stata Center was a better location in the past than the Economics
>> Building
>> if we have the choice...
>>
>> When it was i
2011/12/14 Sriram Ramkrishna :
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Brian Cameron
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Over the years, GNOME community events have grown in frequency, size
>> and the expectations of hosting professional quality events. It is a
>> challenge for a volunteer community to keep up with
I appreciate that we are talking about the technical board as an "open
question" but I fear it could be used as a political tool to override
the decision making process that already exists in the meritocracy.
By giving a board this power you basically allow people who may not
even be active in vari
In order for lower donations to work, we need to set up legal entities
in different regions to accept the donations without losing too much
from transfer fees, shipping of swag and other issues we run into
because the GNOME Foundation is incorporated in the US. For instance
I had to pay peoples tr
nome.org/Accessibility/HackfestAEGIS2010
>
> On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 10:25 -0400, John Palmieri wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm going to be starting the process for setting up the Boston
> Summit.
> > That basically means getting the space at MIT and then a bu
Hello all,
I'm going to be starting the process for setting up the Boston Summit. That
basically means getting the space at MIT and then a budget from the board.
Last year we saw an issue with the timing of other GNOME related conferences.
This year we have a choice of two dates, Columbus da
Sorry to see you leave Behdad. You have been a machine on the board. Paul
has his work cut out to fill your shoes but knowing Paul and the amount of
energy he has put into GNOME I have no doubt he is up to the challenge. I'm
looking forward to the continuing good works coming out of the Board.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
>Why didn't you just say that at the beginning of this thread? (The
> message,
>not the fact that the board should say it. I don't think people should
> wait
>for the board to say/do everything.) That's nicely worded and it would
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 22:59 -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > IMHO talking about Facebook and who should demand them to free info is a
> > bit out of place here. Please let's not diverge the thread into that
> or
> > into a battle
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> The Tampere bid manifested their interest in carrying their 09 bid over
> for 10 - and the KDE board thought that was a good option. Given the
> alternative timeframe (which we're currently experiencing), they said
> "Good enough -
ingness to have
another co-located event the board should do everything possible to make
this happen but if the pieces don't fit, I hope we don't force it.
--
John (J5) Palmieri
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 12:33 -0500, john palmieri w
I would like to point out that the survey was pretty narrow. For instance I
said "do it" but I have the same reservations I had when I voted to not do
it for this years GUADEC. I want to see this happen right, which is to have
us collaborate but at the same time keep our identities.
2010/2/1 Vin
Bonus goals are meant to direct energy into places we feel are most
important for the current cycle. The bonuses both reflect pie in the sky,
you are probably never going to get this done items to more mundane items
which none the less, contribute to the growth of the foundation. We could
just pa
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Lefty (石鏡 )
> wrote:
> >> On 1/17/10 6:52 AM, "Ciaran O'Riordan" wrote:
> >>>
> >>> GNOME has a policy (written or not) that prohibits importing non-fr
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:37 -0500, john palmieri wrote:
>
>
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Philip Van Hoof
> > wrote:
>
> > > The results are more than enlightening to me. The surveys definitel
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 14:38 +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote:
>
> Hi Xavier,
>
> > On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 13:02 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> > > I disrespect people who claim that this last survey has intentional
> > > bias. For me they are be
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 02:01 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote:
>
> Hi Lefty,
>
> > Thanks to Bruno and the rest of the Membership team. It pleases me for
> > some reason to be on the same list of new members as my friend, Jim
> > Vasile.
>
> > On a
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lionel Dricot wrote:
> > Do you think that many people were turned out of the GNOME community
> > because of an hostile experience? I don't think so. (I might be wrong, I
> > just never met anybody that has a bad experience).
>
> Some
I'm against an enshrined code of conduct which suddenly kicks you out of
GNOME, or gets you shunned. A Terms of Service for hosted sites which gets
your account unsubscribed for that site might be better if it is very
narrowly defined, e.g. no spamming, no porn, etc. However as we move into
the r
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> So I guess there is no way back.
>
> Speaking clearly, I wonder what weight in people's opinions (in the
> polls and the board meembers) had the Qt branding in badge, towel,
> roll-up ad in the main entrance, etc. Many GNOME people said they
> di
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:05 AM, sankarshan wrote:
> [taking foundation-announce out of the cc: fields]
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Srinivasa Ragavan
> wrote:
>
> [snippet]
>
> > The main, and most important, reason for not wanting to co-locate
> > next year is because the GNOME commun
Hi Soumen,
Foundation list is not a technical list. Please go here (
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo) to find a more appropriate list in
the future (gtk-list might be a good starting point). I also suggest going
on Freenode irc and chatting with people in #gnome or #gtk. Since you are
r
For those not at the AGM during GUADEC I had announced confirmation on this
years GNOME Boston Summit in October at MIT.
Dates:
October 10th, 11th and 12th
Location:
MIT Sloan Building (E51)
Cambridge, MA
Rooms 315, 325, 335, 345
Hackfests
As of right now we have funding thanks to Novell to h
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Julien Puydt wrote:
> john palmieri a écrit :
>
>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The way forward seems clear to me - the membership committee decides what
>>> counting method will be
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To ensure we weren't running the risk of controversy, I ran the election
> under all variants of STV available, with different methods of
> calculating thresholds and transfers. I can confirm that under all
> scenarios I tried, the resu
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:58 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stormy Peters wrote:
>
>> I too think the election committee should just decide.
>>
>> (From board discussions, I'm pretty confident they wanted to do it however
>> Maemo does it, but at this point I think the election committee should
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Dan Winship wrote:
> On 06/25/2009 12:30 PM, john palmieri wrote:
> > If it is a disagreement on how votes should be counted then the vote is
> > flawed and I propose we have a runoff between the candidates who were on
> > one list but not t
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The way forward seems clear to me - the membership committee decides what
> counting method will be used, announces it, and we count the election
> according to that means. There doesn't need to be a crisis here.
>
>
Deciding on the co
Is it really fair if people can't agree on how it works? Seems to go
against the GNOME principle of simplicity by adding more choices to fix some
of the issues of voting. I'm all for making things more fair but I'm not
sure the complexity actually fixes things or hides the issues under a layer
of
2009 Minutes are now up too. Thanks.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le mercredi 10 juin 2009, à 11:50 +0200, BJörn Lindqvist a écrit :
> > 2009/6/8 Stormy Peters :
> > > The minutes from most of the GNOME Foundation Board of Directors'
> meetings
> > > have now been post
Now that I have had time to gather my thoughts - I would really like the
Foundation to bring back the import of what it means to be part of something
bigger than oneself. GNOME needs to be a brand that is bigger than the sum
of its parts, a place where people come not to further their own agendas
Dear Foundation Members,
In the past, by this time, the Board would have already sent around the GUADEC
call for hosts. In largely closed door meetings it would have been decided
where next year's GUADEC would be held, announcing it at the current year's
conference. Since this has been a year
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> john palmieri wrote:
>
>> I'm of the same mind here. There are a number of people who I don't like
>> to read on blogs and whatnot but I would rather us as a community figure out
>> producti
I'm of the same mind here. There are a number of people who I don't like to
read on blogs and whatnot but I would rather us as a community figure out
productive ways of dealing with it as opposed to lording our own views over
those who don't have as much pull in the community. Red tape and dracon
Woops, didn't hit reply to all!!!
-- Forwarded message --
From: john palmieri
Date: Mon, May 4, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: 2009 Current Year Budget
To: Dave Neary
Hi Dave,
Thanks for starting this discussion, it is very important and you bring up
good points. Let me t
Dear Foundation members,
The 2009 yearly budget has been released. For the past couple of years the
GNOME Foundation has been running a healthy surplus in contributions. As a
result, year after year we have been expanding GNOME related activities and
events. Last year we had the opportunity to
Dear Foundation Members,
Attached is the 2009 budget put together by Stormy. Due to the economy our
budget shows us eating into the surplus quite a bit. While we will remain
solvent for 2009, it is a burn rate we will not be able to sustain in 2010
barring changes in funding level and/or reducti
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Jonathan Blandford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 14:10 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
>
>
> > I've been pushing the board to do the following:
> >
> > Shared:
> > * sponsorship
> > * registration & accommodation recommendations
> > * local team
> > *
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Quim Gil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 8:41 PM, john palmieri
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The one thing we have made clear to our Advisory Board is we do not want
> > this to be an excuse for companies t
The one thing we have made clear to our Advisory Board is we do not want
this to be an excuse for companies to invest less in either events. That
would be disastrous. This is not a joint event. The GNOME Board and KDE eV
agreed on this with the understanding that we are co-located, not one
confe
The idea is that they are two separate events with the exception of a room
reserved for freedesktop.org and other crossover talks. Also keynotes
should most likely be joint as well as the after parties. Everything else
should remain separate as to not drastically change the culture of each
event.
47 matches
Mail list logo
