Re: Question to the candidates.
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:42 AM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: First, while I'm extremely impressed by the huge variety of UI design ideas that GNOME has experimented with, and many of them have been quite successful, I think GNOME needs some mechanism to recognize when an idea isn't working or doesn't really appeal to the majority of users, and say well, that was a fun experiment, but let's drop it. For instance, I rather strongly suspect many GNOME 3 users would sigh with relief if alt-tab went back to switch windows and alt-` became a backward-compatibility synonym. As far as I can tell, though, design ideas only really tend to get dropped when they get replaced with some other, newer design idea; for instance, the notification tray gave way to the excellent new notification mechanism in the latest release of GNOME. I think it would make sense to have a convenient way to float design experiments as extensions or branches, rather than as part of mainline GNOME, until they become less experimental. And in the meantime, I think we need a way, as a community, to decide that a UI experiment was unsuccessful and should be reverted. I just want to say that these two paragraphs is just full of win. There is absolutely needed a mechanism that lets us figure out when something is not working. In GNOME, I think we have problems with either 1) communicating how features are implementing in GNOME 2) communicating how features (if you want to call them that) are removed in GNOME. When features are removed, they do cause regressions and it is important that at least we have some kind of historical reason why we removed it in the first place. While people might object to the removal or adding, that doesn't matter, only that there is a story. Maintainers who remove or add features should provide good notes to the release team on why something was removed or added so that we can provide a good story to the story. I sometimes feel that we don't take into account users who use our systems. Maintainers might have a vision of the end state, but end users may not and when the story is murky it leaves people with vivid imaginations to tell the story. sri ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
People can do as they like on their own systems and resources, but when participating in the GNOME community, they should do so with respect. Refusing to exclude anyone is itself an exclusionary policy; it selects for the kind of people who will put up with absolutely anything, and excludes people who do not feel comfortable in such an environment. That creates a kind of community that I would not want to see GNOME become; there are too many of those already, because there are too many projects unwilling to kick out awful people. I suspect we might actually agree if we debated this properly, but I think you're right and we should try not to digress too much. Just to say, I probably could have worded that a bit better: An objectionable a-hole or awful person might not mean the same thing to you as it does to me, so we probably ought to be a bit careful about defining behaviours in those terms. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates.
Hey Erick! Erick Pérez Castellanos eric...@gnome.org wrote: ... First, thanks to all of you for running as directors. Currently, GNOME is a strong platform for development, but it's lacking integration and features to be a complete, fully integrated desktop environment like Mac OS X, for instance. My question is: What plans do you have to make GNOME a more complete, fully working solution as desktop environment. I could answer that question from a design perspective. However, the Board doesn't make technical or design decisions, so I don't think that would be appropriate. What I can say is that I'm keen to talk with our Advisory Board members about what they want from GNOME, and to make sure that those conversations are fed into our development activities. This is important in order to ensure that Ad Board members feel that their membership is valuable, and to ensure that the project is responsive to the needs of our supporters. As a designer on the project, I think that I'm in a good position to make sure that this happens. Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina! Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: ... Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Most of the time, GNOME is a great place to work and have fun, but sometimes conversations can get heated and/or personal, and the GNOME project has a collective responsibility to manage with these situations. It's important to have effective codes of conduct in place, not just to ensure that GNOME is a friendly and welcoming place, but also so that contributors feel safe from attack, and have support when things go wrong. My view is that a code of conduct needs to strike a balance between length and specificity on the one hand, and readability on the other. In the past, I have found the existing general code of conduct [1] to be too general and vague, and I think that we need something that is longer and clearer. At the same time, a code of conduct is a kind of constitutional document, and sends an important signal about the identity and character of the project, so we need to be careful about having something that seems too prescriptive and bureaucratic. It's not just the rules about conduct that are important here. One thing that we really lack are guidelines about how infringements of the code of conduct should be handled. This creates the danger that people feel unfairly treated if they are accused of breaking the code of conduct, and it opens the door to self-appointed judges taking the law into their own hands. We need to be clear about what should happen if someone breaks the code of conduct. (Who will arbitrate? What are the potential outcomes? What can you do if you disagree with the decision?) My view is that these procedures shouldn't be overly bureaucratic, and should have reconciliation and mediation as their goal, rather than punishment or excommunication. Above all, they should be independent, neutral and fair. Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates.
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:52:55PM -0400, Erick Pérez Castellanos wrote: First, thanks to all of you for running as directors. Currently, GNOME is a strong platform for development, but it's lacking integration and features to be a complete, fully integrated desktop environment like Mac OS X, for instance. My question is: What plans do you have to make GNOME a more complete, fully working solution as desktop environment. First of all, I would suggest that the board of directors has little to do with the overall direction of GNOME's development, from either a technical or design point of view. The many GNOME contributors drive that. The board is responsible for ensuring the continued availability of the resources those contributors need, and for helping maintain and grow the community, among various other organizational issues, but the board does not set development directions in that way, nor do I think it should. That said, I'd still be happy to answer the spirit of your question. I think GNOME actually has a huge amount of integration, polish, and cohesiveness. And there are several aspects of other environments that I hope to never see on GNOME; personally, for instance, I don't really want to see desktop environments delving into app store-style package management. I like distribution package management just fine. (I *do* find sandboxing mechanisms highly appealing for security; I'd just like to continue installing applications, sandboxed or otherwise, through apt.) There are three areas I do think GNOME could use some additional integration and polish in. First, while I'm extremely impressed by the huge variety of UI design ideas that GNOME has experimented with, and many of them have been quite successful, I think GNOME needs some mechanism to recognize when an idea isn't working or doesn't really appeal to the majority of users, and say well, that was a fun experiment, but let's drop it. For instance, I rather strongly suspect many GNOME 3 users would sigh with relief if alt-tab went back to switch windows and alt-` became a backward-compatibility synonym. As far as I can tell, though, design ideas only really tend to get dropped when they get replaced with some other, newer design idea; for instance, the notification tray gave way to the excellent new notification mechanism in the latest release of GNOME. I think it would make sense to have a convenient way to float design experiments as extensions or branches, rather than as part of mainline GNOME, until they become less experimental. And in the meantime, I think we need a way, as a community, to decide that a UI experiment was unsuccessful and should be reverted. Second, GNOME still needs to improve its support for high-DPI displays. Right now, GNOME has great support for high-DPI displays that are sufficiently high-resolution that scaling everything 2:1 is appropriate; for instance, on a 3840x2160 display, doubling everything and effectively treating it as a 1920x1080 display works quite well. However, *many* laptop and desktop displays still have resolutions for which 1:1 is far too small, but 2:1 is too large, defeating the purpose of purchasing a high-resolution display. Treating a 2560x1440 display as 1280x720 makes things awkwardly large. Treating a 3200x1800 display as 1600x900 is still not quite great. Long-term, ever-increasing resolutions will likely make the integer-scaling approach viable; however, in the meantime, supporting only integer scaling leaves much to be desired. I've heard comments from several different people saying that GNOME seems almost cartoonishly big on their displays, and that if they turn off scaling it's too small. On top of that, GNOME only supports a single scaling factor for all monitors, which doesn't work well when switching between a high-DPI and low-DPI display, or using both and moving windows between both. On that front, I actually am taking a concrete step to help there: I'm donating a high-DPI (2560x1440) laptop to GNOME, to be sent to an appropriate developer or developers. And finally, touching directly on your comment about integration, I don't think GNOME can focus exclusively on its own native applications, without also taking into account that many users will run non-GNOME applications side by side with GNOME applications. As GNOME continues to produce innovations in UI, desktop integration standards, system-level features, and similar, someone needs to take the time to integrate such enhancements into popular third-party applications. For example, there has been a patch for Firefox to work with the GNOME application menu for a year or so, but nobody has stepped up to take responsibility for that code once merged. Empathy has deep integration with GNOME, but Pidgin does not. There's no default desktop integration with third-party music player software; that requires a gnome-shell extension. These aren't necessarily innovative ideas. They're not thoughts on
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
- Original Message - From: Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org To: Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com Cc: foundation-list foundation-list@gnome.org Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 1:06:49 PM Subject: Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:41:06AM -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Would you consider putting forth a concrete proposal along those lines, taking into account the models and requirements for an effective code of conduct? Yes, I'd be interested in working on a proposal for an events and community codes of conduct. Thanks to the candidates who shared their thoughts on this so far! Marina In the process, I'd also suggest extending the Applies to for the code of conduct to include not just lists, bugzilla, and specific individuals, but also conferences (such as GUADEC), IRC and other communication, and members of the Foundation and the Board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi! On Sa, 2015-05-23 at 11:41 -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? It's a complicated subject, but I echo pretty much was Alexandre said. I appreciate that we want to make people feel welcome and safe at our events. And I support that goal. I'm not convinced a detailed list of offenses, such as the GUADEC 2014 one, achieves that goal, though. Cheers, Tobi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:05:30PM +0200, Alexandre Franke wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. Except the board did ask the GUADEC 2014 attendees to sign something. There was a box that needed to be checked to register for the conference. I was talking about a hypothetical improvement to the community code of conduct, not to the conference code of conduct. For a conference code of conduct, it makes sense to require explicit assent, not least of which because when people have spent money getting to and attending an event, and they then do something sufficiently severe to warrant being excluded from that event, explicit assent helps protect the conference from further trouble that they might try to stir up as a result. That doesn't apply as much to free online communication and community resources. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. Except the board did ask the GUADEC 2014 attendees to sign something. There was a box that needed to be checked to register for the conference. -- Alexandre Franke ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates.
Hi Erick, This is a little difficult to answer, since is a very wide question that resembles how can we make GNOME better? which is what all of we try to do, and I'm not sure most part of it is directly fixable by the board, but instead indirectly. Said that, as we know by the nature of GNOME being open source works like that, people works on what they want to work, on something that is fun to work, that's why i.e. Nautilus doesn't have lot of contributors, because it's not a fun app (for me it is fun though =D) to work with, because is old code and it's not new. Then on the other hand, companies pay to work on some GNOME modules, and people work on that even if they are not fun to work with, and that fixes part of the problem. So now I guess the question is, what to do with those specific issues that makes GNOME not complete and that free time contributors doesn't work on them because it's not fun, and companies doesn't pay people to work on them? In my candidacy email I stated some of those ideas, the more prominent and known is BountySource, which seems sometimes works, sometimes not (there is a 1000$ bounty for GtkSourceView for a few years now), so that makes me think that BountySource doesn't work for big issues. But then I had the idea of the GNOME excellency program, inspired on GSOC, which makes a person work on something big and that we consider top priority, paying a little more than GSOC and selecting candidates only if they provide a strong background to complete the task (since as we know GSOC rate of fully completion of tasks are rather small...). In this way we can fix specific long standing issues that could help a lot to reach the complete desktop solution we all want. Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - | Hi: | | First, thanks to all of you for running as directors. | | Currently, GNOME is a strong platform for development, but it's lacking | integration and features to be a complete, fully integrated desktop | environment like Mac OS X, for instance. My question is: | | What plans do you have to make GNOME a more complete, fully working solution | as desktop environment. | | Cheers, and good luck! | | ___ | 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: Question to the candidates (what is a complete desktop?)
Replying inline to your reply (stripping my own previous text): [...] I'm not asking you to be technical, but to be managers. (Not saying here that manager can/should/must be non-technical) [...] Being a director of the board for me, means having the power to allocate resources to make GNOME better, gather the community consensus and improve HDPi support the way we did once, for instance. [...] So far, you've tell me what you want, not how to accomplish it. And I know, we as community provide a huge pools of ideas and discussion, but I would love to know how each candidate thinks about it. I would like a board of directors to be strong leaders of the project, with clears views on what to improve and how. As others have indicated in the original thread, the Foundation Board is not a technical body, it is a legal/financial/policymaking entity. We can express a vision (as I did in my message and blog post, for example) and communicate with teams (ex: the release team) individuals to encourage the adoption of that vision, but apart from, say, sponsoring hackfests for competent parties interested in making it happen, the board can't do much. And even if it _was_ part of its mission to oversee technical direction, as things stand it wouldn't happen because there's already way too many legal/financial/etc. tasks in the backlog that the board needs to solve before getting down to technical matters. Your vision of managers is one that would work in a corporate setting with project/team managers that get to decide what people do on a day to day basis. It doesn't work that way in a community, we're not people's bosses. Allocating (financial) resources beyond supporting events doesn't magically solve things. Unless we had a multi-million dollars budget to hire full-time hackers like the Linux Foundation, that is ;) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates.
Hi Erick First, thanks to all of you for running as directors. Thanks for your question! Currently, GNOME is a strong platform for development, but it's lacking integration and features to be a complete, fully integrated desktop environment like Mac OS X, for instance. My question is: What plans do you have to make GNOME a more complete, fully working solution as desktop environment. As others have suggested this may be beyond the remit for this board, but one thing I have been fairly keen on is the idea of raising a debate about the merits of establishing a technical board of directors who could lead the way on these sorts of matters... I suspect that having a democratic selection process for such a proposed set of technical directors, could help improve communication between teams and make the decision making process a bit more transparent and accountable, in the long run. Thanks again, Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, Hi, Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? First of all, it is important for people participating in the community activities, be them online (mailing list discussions, IRC, bugzilla…) or offline (GUADEC, hackfests…), to be aware that they have someone they can talk to if they need to. They should also know that suffering from attacks, or feeling like it is the case, is nothing to be ashamed of, and that they can trust the listed contacts to have a listening hear and provide an appropriate response. It is however also very important for them to feel welcome and I know that a code such as the one used for GUADEC 2014 fails to achieve that. As the organizer, I was approached by people, seasoned contributors as well as newcomers, who told me they felt uneasy because the code conveyed the message that there was a constant threat and that they should be on their guard. I share their concerns and I would feel the same way if I had to attend another event with the same code. I want to emphasize that I'm not saying there is no threat at all, and I'm taking this very seriously. What I'm saying here is that we want a positive environment. Long texts also suffer from the TL;DR (Too Long; Didn't Read) effect, and I'm convinced many people who sign up for events with a checkbox saying I have read the code of conduct and I agree to this terms actually think yada yada yada whatever, I just want to participate and I don't care/have time to read this. Some people have argued to me that it's ok since all we should care about is people signing off the code so that it can be enforced on them. This is a pretty shortsighted way of thinking and I'd say I'd rather have people read and take into account a short message without having to sign anything than them signing something they don't acknowledge and us having to take action afterwards. Another issue I have with strong codes of conduct is that often they try to substitute themselves to the appropriate authorities. There are laws and bodies whose job is to enforce them. The people in charge of a gathering should not have to list illegal activities as unacceptable. Most of us are not lawyers and have limited knowledge of the legality of such texts, even more so in an international context such as ours. We should strive to act as interfaces with the local authorities, not try to supersede them. That is of course not to say that we should call the police when the appropriate response is to call someone out on their bad behaviour, but threatening with sanctions is most of the time inappropriate too. The last point I want to cover is codes of conduct vs. their actual implementation. In many cases, organizers decide on a code of conduct but then they don't properly train the staff or take actions. If you have a look at the timeline of incidents on the geek feminist wiki, you'll find examples of such cases. I consider more important to have people willing to help and prepared than having the code itself. In fact, while I disagree with the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct and they way it was handled, I was happy to give a hand to solve issues at previous events which I helped organize. -- Alexandre Franke ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, I think we all agree we want a welcome community, and that means searching for the commune divisor and not allowing anything outside that. As far as I saw, all the previous answer from the candidates share the same opinion. I would actually like to have a code of conduct for every part of GNOME, like IRC, Bugzilla, events, etc. And I always though this one https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct is not enough. But it's true that even if I take seriously any inappropriate language or discrimination, I felt uncomfortable reading the code of conduct of GUADEC 2014, and I think we don't have to substitute law forces, because we are not. I'm thinking something more concise and shorter than the one at GUADEC 2014, with a more friendly language, but expressing a strong position and applicable to all parts of GNOME. I have in mind something like: --- In GNOME we want a friendly community and we require these points from every person involved: - Friendly and polite language. - No discrimination, and respect towards believes, race or gender. - Not inappropriate jokes, images or comments. - In doubt, be always cautious, don't assume the other person thinks like you. Always ask firsts. If you think someone misbehave on the points above described or you feel uncomfortable for any reason, even in something different than those points, don't hesitate to contact the GNOME code of conduct support team or people in charge, we will glad to talk and help you =) Any misbehavior could cause to take any actions from the GNOME code of conduct support team or the people in charge. --- Which also includes taking actions on IRC and Bugzilla towards the people that insult or shows an unfriendly behavior. I think anything else relies in the law authorities (we can't do more than just expel and ban the person, but some actions could require more), and we have to delegate to them everything that surpasses those points... A detailed code of conduct could for one part, suffer the TLDR as Alexander said, and on the other part, limit the actions GNOME can take towards misbehavior that was not thought when the code of conduct was written. i.e. The misbehaving person can say: It's written like this, so you can't take a different action than what is written. Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - | Hi, | | Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all | the work you already do for the Foundation! | | Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their | events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct | with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community | has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are | subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such | behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in | getting it addressed. | | What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the | one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly | detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? | | Thanks, | Marina | | [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption | [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Adoption | [3] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ | ___ | 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: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 05:15:29PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. I would partially agree. The purpose of the candidate QA is for prospective voters to seek out information they desire about candidates, in order to inform their vote. So, to the extent people are seeking further information specifically about the candidates and their positions, that's fine; to the extent people are looking to discuss codes of conduct in general, or start a large discussion about what GNOME should actually do, that should wait until we have the new board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
2015-05-23 17:41 GMT+02:00 Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Having a final version of the Code of Conduct (from now, CoC) for the yearly GNOME events is definitely something the new Board should look at during the next term. While we can't legally enforce anything - as we don't have the jurisdiction to do so - it's important for new and existing contributors to know what they should expect from an event the GNOME Foundation organizes. The events we promote see the participation of contributors and users from all over the world coming from different countries, religions and habits having in common their love for the GNOME platform and community. One of our duties, as Board members, is to ensure these people feel comfortable participating at the events we promote and that no harassment or other inappropriate behaviour takes place on any of these events. In addition the CoC should be the document where offended people can find a local contact to report the inappropriate behaviour they were target of. There seems to be a misunderstanding [1] on what the purpose of a CoC is and how enforceable one might be and at what level. The GNOME Foundation (or any other private organization) does not have the jurisdiction to enforce a document such as the one proposed for the GUADEC 2014 edition [2]. A breakage of the CoC does not directly result in a civil or penal sanction of any form unless the relevant legal entity (police, local law enforcement) verifies the occurrence and issues it. The same applies with a different communication channel such as the Internet where abusers might get a ban for their account or IP without receiving any other possible legal consequence. That said breaking any of the rules (I would define them as General guidelines when participating to a GNOME event) won't result in a lawsuit or other local law enforcement *unless* the behaviour is explicitly listed as in illicit (violation of a duty, obligation or generally considered as harmful for other people) from a law of the State where the event is taking place. In the case of GNOME's CoC (I'm looking at the GUADEC 2014 edition) pretty much all the offending behaviours listed there would be considered as illicit from the vast majority of countries in the world as they truly represent a menace to people's dignity, integrity and freedom and thus enforceable even by the local law enforcement. [1] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2015-May/msg00052.html [2] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ -- Cheers, Andrea Debian Developer, Fedora / EPEL packager, GNOME Infrastructure Team Coordinator, GNOME Foundation Board of Directors Secretary, GNOME Foundation Membership Elections Committee Chairman Homepage: http://www.gnome.org/~av ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:42PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? Marina linked to several resources about codes of conduct and their effectiveness; specifically, see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Code_of_conduct_evaluations . For instance, a more effective Code of Conduct should include information like For issues arising on mailing lists, IRC, or Bugzilla, contact exam...@gnome.org, who can help address issues, and if necessary, can limit or ban access to those resources. Which I would hope is simply a statement of what we'd *already* do; I'd be shocked, for instance, if the IRC channel operators or server admins have never had to ban anyone. For the record: I'm not personally looking to put forth a proposal to update the current community code of conduct; I'm simply stating that I would be quite receptive to a well-considered proposal to do so. I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. And that's the upper limit of what a Code of Conduct for a mailing list, IRC channel, Bugzilla, or other community resource should do as well: expel someone from a list, channel, Bugzilla server, etc. Nobody's talking about a document that has legal effect. While I disagree with the portion of the current CoC that says There is no official enforcement of these principles (not least of which for almost certainly being inaccurate), I agree with the this should not be interpreted like a legal document. For instance, nobody should be saying well, they're acting terribly and being disruptive, we all know it, but they're not violating the exact letter of the CoC, so my hands are tied. I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. Nobody is asking anyone to sign anything. A CoC would simply be a stated policy for expected behavior on community resources, such as mailing lists, IRC, Bugzilla, wikis, email, etc. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:42PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? Marina linked to several resources about codes of conduct and their effectiveness; specifically, see http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Code_of_conduct_evaluations . For instance, a more effective Code of Conduct should include information like For issues arising on mailing lists, IRC, or Bugzilla, contact exam...@gnome.org, who can help address issues, and if necessary, can limit or ban access to those resources. Which I would hope is simply a statement of what we'd *already* do; I'd be shocked, for instance, if the IRC channel operators or server admins have never had to ban anyone. For the record: I'm not personally looking to put forth a proposal to update the current community code of conduct; I'm simply stating that I would be quite receptive to a well-considered proposal to do so. I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. And that's the upper limit of what a Code of Conduct for a mailing list, IRC channel, Bugzilla, or other community resource should do as well: expel someone from a list, channel, Bugzilla server, etc. Nobody's talking about a document that has legal effect. While I disagree with the portion of the current CoC that says There is no official enforcement of these principles (not least of which for almost certainly being inaccurate), I agree with the this should not be interpreted like a legal document. For instance, nobody should be saying well, they're acting terribly and being disruptive, we all know it, but they're not violating the exact letter of the CoC, so my hands are tied. OK in light of these responses, I feel I should maybe better clarify that whilst I agree this sort of stance may be a fair way to moderated communications with non-members, I do not agree with expelling card carrying members from lists, channels or servers under any circumstances. If someone has committed a *serious* breach of conduct, then the board do technically already have the power to revoke foundation membership which is the upper limit of what the board can enforce - (what’s currently lacking is a clear, transparent and fair process for that). In such *exceptional* circumstances, such privileges as access to the mailing list, IRC or git subscriptions could (in theory) justifiably be revoked under GNOME’s bylaws and California State law. However, partial exclusion of any card carrying member via an informal process could too easily become an affront to our democracy, lead to censorship, discriminatory treatment or victimisation, so therefore this is not a policy I could ever advocate, in principle. Ultimately, people have a right to be objectionable a-holes. as long as they are not infringing on anyone else’s rights in the process, in my view. I hope that better clarifies my stance on this issue. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:34:14AM +0100, Magdalen Berns wrote: OK in light of these responses, I feel I should maybe better clarify that whilst I agree this sort of stance may be a fair way to moderated communications with non-members, I do not agree with expelling card carrying members from lists, channels or servers under any circumstances. I agree that people should not lose access to resources while remaining a Foundation member. An offense serious enough to permanently lose access to those resources is an offense serious enough to revoke someone's membership in the Foundation. Let us hope that we don't ever have to put that into practice. Ultimately, people have a right to be objectionable a-holes. as long as they are not infringing on anyone else’s rights in the process, in my view. I regret that this mail is too short to fully contain the depths of my disagreement. Rather than continue an extensive debate on what is likely a fundamental point of disagreement, I'll summarize my own position on the same point, and leave the rest for some time other than the candidate QA period: People can do as they like on their own systems and resources, but when participating in the GNOME community, they should do so with respect. Refusing to exclude anyone is itself an exclusionary policy; it selects for the kind of people who will put up with absolutely anything, and excludes people who do not feel comfortable in such an environment. That creates a kind of community that I would not want to see GNOME become; there are too many of those already, because there are too many projects unwilling to kick out awful people. See also http://www.slideshare.net/dberkholz/assholes-are-killing-your-project - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates (what is a complete desktop?)
Hi Erick, This is such a large question, and possibly a fairly technical one, I'm not sure it is within the scope of board candidates to debate this. Unless you clearly define what you mean by complete, fully integrated desktop environment… as everyone is going to have a different opinion on what that means. Besides, plenty of people are going to disagree and say that Free desktops like GNOME are already technically better (or equal to) OS X (or Windows) and inherently better by definition of being different and Free. On a UX level, some people can't stand using Windows or OS X after seeing what GNOME has to offer (ie: using other platforms then feels like stepping back ten years and swimming through molasse). Not to say that our app ecosystem is perfect. We have yet to have something to counter the infamous Creative Suite on a professional level when it comes to video/multimedia (non-linear and/or node-based video and audio editors and compositors come to mind). But hey, part of that puzzle is just something I've been working on for a decade! Besides the multimedia-specific area above, make GNOME a creativity workhorse platform is the global goal we should be aiming for. And by that, I include stuff like mindmapping, annotating documents (with easily typed or handwritten notes in PDF or ODF documents for example) or filling dynamic PDF forms. By the way, LibreOffice is making fantastic progress lately. I can really feel the improvements with each release (couldn't say that from its predecessor), and it seems that we will soon have something very solid on the office productivity front. Additionally, LibLibreOffice (semi-official nickname?) could be an interesting opportunity for developing a LibreOffice-based GNOME Office Suite as a simplified set of frontends (think: alternative to Apple iWork), providing a more GNOMEish UX for simpler everyday office work needs (closer to the simplicity of Google Documents, for example). There has to be a significant amount of interest in the community for people to step up and do that work though. Personally, I want our desktop to have incredible performance and be *solid as a mountain's bedrock*. The core/shell experience must not ever slow down or freeze. It must gracefully handle driver bugs, apps deployments and upgrades, and system resources (we need watchdogs, everywhere). I've lost count of the times I had to hard-reset my system (or quickly kill things through SSH, with some luck) because of some random pointer grab deadlock, because of a network IO deadlock preventing my mail client from exiting, because the system can't cope with a browser having too many tabs open, opening too big of an image in EOG (which kills the X server!), opening too many images in GIMP without shutting down my web browser first, etc. We can do better. There's lots of work to do in this area, but it's a vast metaproject to undertake and it will take a concerted effort (ie: making one or two GNOME release cycles all about performance, or some desktop-wide performance reliability hackfests, maybe). In theory, the browser story is probably best solved by the combination of sandboxing with improvements to Epiphany (aka Web). Epiphany is our window into the biggest information application market out there, the World Wide Web; it needs to have a much better UX and performance for handling tons of active and inactive tabs, and transient information in general, such as a way to painlessly manage reading lists and bookmarks. You'd be shocked if you saw how many (groups of) tabs I have stashed in Firefox's Panorama feature. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question to the candidates (what is a complete desktop?)
There's some comments inline. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Jeff Fortin Tam nekoh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Erick, This is such a large question, and possibly a fairly technical one, I'm not sure it is within the scope of board candidates to debate this. I'm not asking you to be technical, but to be managers. (Not saying here that manager can/should/must be non-technical) Unless you clearly define what you mean by complete, fully integrated desktop environment… as everyone is going to have a different opinion on what that means. Besides, plenty of people are going to disagree and say that Free desktops like GNOME are already technically better (or equal to) OS X (or Windows) and inherently better by definition of being different and Free. On a UX level, some people can't stand using Windows or OS X after seeing what GNOME has to offer (ie: using other platforms then feels like stepping back ten years and swimming through molasse). I'm talking from the point of view of the user. A simple user needs a desktop environment in which fulfills his daily tasks. And clearly, GNOME is lacking here in some areas like: integration between modules, some basic applications a modern desktop provide, performance, etc. For instance, Allan recently made a call on GNOME to complete a small number of core applications, which are a bit far away of what we as a community has. That's what I'm asking. Being a director of the board for me, means having the power to allocate resources to make GNOME better, gather the community consensus and improve HDPi support the way we did once, for instance. Not to say that our app ecosystem is perfect. We have yet to have something to counter the infamous Creative Suite on a professional level when it comes to video/multimedia (non-linear and/or node-based video and audio editors and compositors come to mind). But hey, part of that puzzle is just something I've been working on for a decade! Besides the multimedia-specific area above, make GNOME a creativity workhorse platform is the global goal we should be aiming for. And by that, I include stuff like mindmapping, annotating documents (with easily typed or handwritten notes in PDF or ODF documents for example) or filling dynamic PDF forms. By the way, LibreOffice is making fantastic progress lately. I can really feel the improvements with each release (couldn't say that from its predecessor), and it seems that we will soon have something very solid on the office productivity front. Additionally, LibLibreOffice (semi-official nickname?) could be an interesting opportunity for developing a LibreOffice-based GNOME Office Suite as a simplified set of frontends (think: alternative to Apple iWork), providing a more GNOMEish UX for simpler everyday office work needs (closer to the simplicity of Google Documents, for example). There has to be a significant amount of interest in the community for people to step up and do that work though. Personally, I want our desktop to have incredible performance and be *solid as a mountain's bedrock*. The core/shell experience must not ever slow down or freeze. It must gracefully handle driver bugs, apps deployments and upgrades, and system resources (we need watchdogs, everywhere). I've lost count of the times I had to hard-reset my system (or quickly kill things through SSH, with some luck) because of some random pointer grab deadlock, because of a network IO deadlock preventing my mail client from exiting, because the system can't cope with a browser having too many tabs open, opening too big of an image in EOG (which kills the X server!), opening too many images in GIMP without shutting down my web browser first, etc. We can do better. There's lots of work to do in this area, but it's a vast metaproject to undertake and it will take a concerted effort (ie: making one or two GNOME release cycles all about performance, or some desktop-wide performance reliability hackfests, maybe). So far, you've tell me what you want, not how to accomplish it. And I know, we as community provide a huge pools of ideas and discussion, but I would love to know how each candidate thinks about it. I would like a board of directors to be strong leaders of the project, with clears views on what to improve and how. In theory, the browser story is probably best solved by the combination of sandboxing with improvements to Epiphany (aka Web). Epiphany is our window into the biggest information application market out there, the World Wide Web; it needs to have a much better UX and performance for handling tons of active and inactive tabs, and transient information in general, such as a way to painlessly manage reading lists and bookmarks. You'd be shocked if you saw how many (groups of) tabs I have stashed in Firefox's Panorama feature. This is one the things I've noticed, we've been trying to solve the tabs problems of Web for some cycles now. That's basic
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, Thanks for your question! What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I hold the view that the vast majority people will consciously do their best to avoid drawing negative attention to themselves unless they feel they have support. Ideally, we want to be able to do what we can to nurture an atmosphere where members still feel free to express themselves, but also recognise that this self expression will not be supported if it comes at the direct expense of anyone else’s rights. We also want to be able to provide a concrete means of reassuring contributors that their wellbeing matters to us. I would therefore advocate that the event CoC initiative employed last year at GUADEC continue and I would also advocate taking the idea of a community CoC forward in principle too. As regards the formal community CoC idea specifically: I reckon it would likely need to contain some very considered wording to ensure it’s not left too open to subjective misinterpretation and it would probably be advisable for us to ensure we publish it along with a clear and transparent complaints policy which outlines a) how complaints are going to be handled, b) how long they are going to take to be processed, c) who is specifically responsible for dealing with them and d) what our approach to confidentiality is. Anyway, I am really pleased you have raised a debate about this and I agree that it is important. I hope that the idea gets a heathy concensus from the rest of the community too, as I would be very willing to get behind it. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Why and how is it definitely insufficient? I quite like the Code of Conduct and I've signed it. By contrast, the 2014 GUADEC one is a very long statement specifically about a conference, not about a community. I don't see how the board has _any_ influence on the GNOME community. This while the conference one assumes you're attending a conference and that someone can expel you, can possibility contact law enforcement, etc. I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. I think in the question the GNOME community vs foundation members are mixed up. Those are not the same thing. I'm a bit surprised that people see a Code of Conduct as something new. See e.g. https://mail.gnome.org/; we already expect people to follow the Code of Conduct. And before someone misunderstands, I have enforced the Code of Conduct, I've signed the existing one and agree to the thoughts behind both. This maybe my annoyance with volunteering and then getting too much do this or else.. that takes the fun out of it. I prefer assume people mean well. For lurkers: https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct -- Regards, Olav ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Olav, I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I could do without that. I am not sure why you are concerned that a community code of conduct could cause legal issues for you, are you able to elaborate on that? I think in the question the GNOME community vs foundation members are mixed up. Those are not the same thing. I'm a bit surprised that people see a Code of Conduct as something new. See e.g. https://mail.gnome.org/; we already expect people to follow the Code of Conduct. Marina can correct me if I am inadvertently misrepresenting her intention here, but I think the reason she is suggestion a community code of conduct is essentially because the mailing list code of conduct is (as the name suggests) specific to the mailing list and there is also no official enforcement of those sorts of principles (nor should their be, in my view). And before someone misunderstands, I have enforced the Code of Conduct, I've signed the existing one and agree to the thoughts behind both. Which CoC are you referring to here? (there's so many in this thread now, I can't keep up! ;-)) This maybe my annoyance with volunteering and then getting too much do this or else.. that takes the fun out of it. I prefer assume people mean well. I am aware this concern exists for some members of the community about the principle of CoCs and I can sympathise with that worry too, but let's explore in context: Assuming people mean well on the mailing list is really just another way of saying don't jump to conclusions. Objectively that's a really sensible thing to suggest people to think about doing on mailing lists, since lots of people do often react without thinking on those things... However, this is about how we propose to address *serious* examples of detrimental misconduct, not trivial mailing list squabbles which members are able to resolve between themselves. Magdalen ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Richard, I agree, it is probably appropriate for those of us who have answered to hold off on debating about CoCs for the time being. Apologies for the noise. I'm happy to back off so other candidates can answer Marina's question. Do carry on... :D Magdalen On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi Marina, On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Marina Zhurakhinskaya mari...@redhat.com wrote: What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I welcomed the adoption of an event code of conduct for GUADEC 2014, and I would support extending similar rules for events organized by GNOME. I don't think that all events necessarily need the same level of detail though; as an example in events that are invite-only, like hackfests, it might be overkill or not viable for the organizers to formalize a code of conduct, or have a team to enforce it. I also like to think that in such settings the social situation is less prone to incidents that require a code of conduct to resolve, as participants likely know each other already and are pre-selected. I'm more ambivalent about extending a community-wide code of conduct beyond the current one; mostly because it can be hard to determine the boundaries of the community such code would try to protect and really hard to enforce anything on some channels in practice. The current code also does not make distinction between disrespect/harassment (Be respectful and considerate, even though the word harassment is not used) and etiquette best-practices (Try to be concise), and I don't think there should be any enforcement on the latter parts. I would be interested in understanding what kind of improvements and goals you have in mind for such a community code of conduct. Cheers, Cosimo ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] I suggest that we postpone discussion on codes of conduct until after the election. It is likely be a very big debate and likely to drown out discussion with the candidates. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
code of conduct question for Board candidates
Hi, Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? Thanks, Marina [1] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment/Adoption [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Community_anti-harassment/Adoption [3] https://2014.guadec.org/conduct/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: code of conduct question for Board candidates
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:41:06AM -0400, Marina Zhurakhinskaya wrote: Thanks to all the candidates for stepping up to run for the board and for all the work you already do for the Foundation! Many free software organizations have adopted codes of conduct for their events [1] and some for their communities [2]. Detailed codes of conduct with specific enforcement guidelines signal to newcomers that the community has high standards of behavior. They give participants who observe or are subject to inappropriate behavior something to point to that shows that such behavior is outside of what is expected and guidelines on how to proceed in getting it addressed. What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community? I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events and in general. And thank you for raising this issue. Some searching turned up https://wiki.gnome.org/Foundation/CodeOfConduct , but that's definitely insufficient. (It's a nice set of sentiments, but not a functional code of conduct.) By contrast, the GUADEC 2014 code of conduct you linked to sets the higher standard I would expect, and that I've come to expect from other conferences as well. I'm in favor of improving the general code of conduct to the same standard. Would you consider putting forth a concrete proposal along those lines, taking into account the models and requirements for an effective code of conduct? In the process, I'd also suggest extending the Applies to for the code of conduct to include not just lists, bugzilla, and specific individuals, but also conferences (such as GUADEC), IRC and other communication, and members of the Foundation and the Board. - Josh Triplett ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the Candidates: Donations to application developers?
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 22:03 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: Hi, perhaps a little late to the party here but I thought I'd ask anyway. One of the most frequent enhancements people suggest to gnome-software is the ability to donate to both upstream applications, and to independent developers. This is something I think we need to address if we want random developers to actually write applications for GNOME. Allan suggested something GNOME-specific without too much detail but a lot of people have suggested something like a GNOME-themed Flattr page, which only really works for GNOME applications and means we rely on a non-free-software service (albeit one that's solved a lot of legal problems). There are a plethora of legal (do we allow refunds?), ethical (should we be encouraging users to pay for free software?) and other issues, and it would be interesting to hear what candidates have to say about this. Thanks, Richard. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list I understand of course that implementing working a solution is not a trivial thing and have many challenges but for me that is to large degree what GNOME are about, find free software solutions to hard problems. I see this as yet another area where GNOME can pioneer and advance free software. Selling free software is as probably most of you who are following this list are nothing new. RMS sold copies of emacs on discs (complete with source code of course) in the 80’s [2] and before RedHat switched to a subscription model for its operating system, the main revenue for the company was selling Linux operating systems in a CD-box [3]. I think that in the last years with the introduction of the different appstores many people are today happy to pay for good quality software [4], especially if its a small price, some people even think that gratis software equals bad quality. I do not think its realistic long-term in today’s market to have a platform and not offer developers a way of monazite app development. I don’t expect this to be an easy journey, there will sure be bumps in the road but I think the longer we wait with implementing a solution the more we distance ourselves from the general developer community. 1 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708269 2 Free Software, Free Society, 2nd by Richard Stallman, page 12 for reference 3 http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/09/23/red_hat_q2_revenue_up/ 4http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/smartphone-owners-willing-to-pay-for-apps/#!beZgiz I know the election are over, but did not see this until now and wanted to clearly state my opinion on this topic. -- -mvh Oliver Propst ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A Question for New Candidates
Thanks to everyone for your answers. That was useful information. Allan On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna s...@ramkrishna.me wrote: Sorry for my late response. I've been at a conference all of this week and I was not able to focus on the question. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, Big thanks to everyone who has put themselves forward as a board candidate. It's really awesome that you are willing to spend time on the foundation. It's also fantastic that we have so many fantastic new candidates this time around, and I have a question for you. One thing I find myself asking is: what do you think you will personally bring to the role if you are elected? In other words: why do you think that you will be a good board member? Every once of us brings their set of skills and experience that will make us good members. For myself, I've been on the project for a long awhile as a volunteer. I've never been a coder but satisfied myself as doing a lot of non-coding related things like articles, bug reports and the like. The GNOME Journal was one of the projects that I worked on for many years. The years have also given me familiarity with everyone in the project as well as outside. I'd like to think that people take me seriously when I weigh in on an issue. When I do talk about an issue, I try to be careful in making sure that my comments are carefully written and moves conversation forward while continuing to be polite. I'm careful not to weigh in on things that I can't make a positive contribution on. I have stellar reputation outside of GNOME coming from recent years of advocacy on GNOME's behalf. In those times I have gained experience in community management from countless hours of discussions in forums, mailing lists, and social media. I've stated that I want to work on community management, and working with external organizations. I feel these skills I have gained in the past couple years will be valuable being on the board. I don't expect an essay here, btw. :) Thanks again, Allan ___ 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: A Question for New Candidates
Hi Allan On 21 May 2013 11:12, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote: […] It's also fantastic that we have so many fantastic new candidates this time around, and I have a question for you. One thing I find myself asking is: what do you think you will personally bring to the role if you are elected? In other words: why do you think that you will be a good board member? Besides the obvious necessities of time and commitment, I realise that a large part of the board work is not particularly glamorous yet is essential to the continued existence of the Foundation and the community which it supports. As you probably noticed, I did not put myself down for any specific role when I sent in my candidacy. I think that I would be well suited to take on the role of treasurer from Shaun, who has been doing an excellent job, as I have experience in the area through my current and previous work. In my candidacy statement, I listed some specifics, such as improving the events workflow, and I think that a position on the board would allow me to achieve this effectively. Kat ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A Question for New Candidates
- Original Message - From: Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com To: foundation-list foundation-list@gnome.org Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 6:12:45 AM Subject: A Question for New Candidates Hi everyone, Big thanks to everyone who has put themselves forward as a board candidate. It's really awesome that you are willing to spend time on the foundation. It's also fantastic that we have so many fantastic new candidates this time around, and I have a question for you. One thing I find myself asking is: what do you think you will personally bring to the role if you are elected? In other words: why do you think that you will be a good board member? I think I'd be a good board member because I have * willingness to reach out to people - both newcomers and people in the wider Free Software / technology community * insight into the design and development process of GNOME * attention to detail * ability to come up with new solutions, plan things out, and follow through I don't expect an essay here, btw. :) Thanks again, Allan Thank you, Marina ___ 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
A Question for New Candidates
Hi everyone, Big thanks to everyone who has put themselves forward as a board candidate. It's really awesome that you are willing to spend time on the foundation. It's also fantastic that we have so many fantastic new candidates this time around, and I have a question for you. One thing I find myself asking is: what do you think you will personally bring to the role if you are elected? In other words: why do you think that you will be a good board member? I don't expect an essay here, btw. :) Thanks again, Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question to the candidates
On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 11:21 +0200, Gil Forcada wrote: Hi all, First of all thanks for running for this critical role on GNOME! My question is about hardware and contacts: The average user is not going to ever install its own operating system by itself, for them hardware and software come together and they die together, so a new version of Windows means a new laptop and so on, a new iPhone OS means a new iPhone hardware... So the crucial part here are ISV, contacting them, engaging with them and finally making them ship our great software to the end user. Note that in my view is lack of such a well supported context for businesses in the GNOME community what led to the switch from Gtk+ to Qt during the Fremantle to Harmattan platforms at Nokia. Now its history of course, but reflecting on it wouldn't be a bad exercise. In mobile and embedded is Qt in high demand. Here you can find a Qt job quite easily. I can effectively name 3 or 4 companies that are looking for a C++/Qt developer nearby Brussels and Antwerp. None for Gtk+. Of course with Nokia more or less stopping with Qt is demand for Qt also lower as before. But Gtk+ isn't filling up the gap. I rather notice that commercial activity in mobile and embedded is going back to the Windows platform, to Android and to iOS. Even Flash is more often used on embedded than Gtk+. How bad can it get? You can have all the ideologies about freedom and free software you want, and it seems to be the only though question being asked to the candidates this year, but without enough commercial activity around the GNOME platform like we had during the 770, N800, N810 and N900 will the amount of people working on it, will students lose interest and will future innovation in it be low. I think this is GNOME's bigger-picture problem: its hostility towards ISVs and commercial activity. Is that something that you both find important and also will try to pursue if you are elected? Cheers, -- Philip Van Hoof Software developer Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com wrote: On Mon 28 May 2012 11:53, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com writes: I would personally like to see the board be a more proactive organization, where the needs of the GNOME project are discussed, and initiatives intended to benefit it are instigated and managed. I'd like there be less 'we need someone to organise GUADEC' and more 'let's come up with ways to make GNOME an attractive place for hackers to work'. This would inevitably lead to more visibility and greater engagement by the wider community. Why do you need a board for that? These needs can be fulfilled without relying on hierarchy. Heh. There might well be other vehicles for this; it'd be cool to hear other ideas. But for me, the board is a good fit. Members make a time commitment for the year (very important), are experienced contributors, and the annual vote gives people a stake in what they are doing, as well as giving a bit of legitimacy and influence (the last bit might not be essential, but it does help). Also, the board's existing activities (helping with hackfests, talking to partners, allocating funds) would work with what I'm suggesting. Allan -- IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question to the candidates
On 05/27/2012 11:21 AM, Gil Forcada wrote: My question is about hardware and contacts: The average user is not going to ever install its own operating system by itself, for them hardware and software come together and they die together, so a new version of Windows means a new laptop and so on, a new iPhone OS means a new iPhone hardware... Yes, I think that is crucial to spreading of free software. As we don't yet have any kind of image with a base OS, so that is currently up to the distributions. OSTree is a good step in this direction. The KDE Vivaldi initiative seems interesting and something that I think is worth investigating further, but I don't think it's worth doing quite yet until we have other pieces of the stack ready. So the crucial part here are ISV, contacting them, engaging with them and finally making them ship our great software to the end user. Our story for allowing ISV's get their software in the hands of users currently sucks (say I want the newest GIMP on release day, but...no). Things like glick, extensions.gnome.org and Xan's webapp work is a step in the right direction and I think it would be worth some foundation money to do a hackfest around this. - Andreas ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
On Mon 28 May 2012 11:53, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com writes: I would personally like to see the board be a more proactive organization, where the needs of the GNOME project are discussed, and initiatives intended to benefit it are instigated and managed. I'd like there be less 'we need someone to organise GUADEC' and more 'let's come up with ways to make GNOME an attractive place for hackers to work'. This would inevitably lead to more visibility and greater engagement by the wider community. Why do you need a board for that? These needs can be fulfilled without relying on hierarchy. [Anarchist] Andy ;) -- http://wingolog.org/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board meeting minutes - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
Emmanuele: On 05/28/12 12:06 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: [just a bit of backstory, here, also to help out eventual other candidates in case I'm not elected] the meeting minutes are written down during the meeting itself by using a collaborative editor, so that everyone on the meeting can actually review in real time what's being written (this also helps in case I could not hear or understand what was being said, or when I am talking about some topic/action item, in which case I cannot really take notes). It was Vincent's idea to use a collaborative editor, and something we started really using in my first term as director. I think it does make minute taking a lot easier. Since Karen, Zana, and multiple directors tend to help with the note-taking, the notes end up better written. after the meeting is over, the minute is published on the Foundation's restricted wiki space, for further review, in case I missed a private section, or I was being overzealous with one, as well as for clearing up some of the action items. after some time pass, the wiki page for the minutes is copied over to the public section of the Foundation's wiki space, and the contents are sent using an email. none of this is automated: Brian was just exceptionally good at sending out minutes every two weeks. :-) I can confirm that our process is not very automated, and putting together good minutes is time consuming. I would say the work Emmanuele has done compares well with the work done by other GNOME Foundation secretaries. While they have not been as timely as they could be, the quality of the content has remained high. During my two terms as secretary, I did most of the work of preparing the agenda even though agenda preparation is really the role of the president. This year, since I have been acting as president, I have been preparing the agendas. The last week's minutes (whether made public or not) are used as a template to build the agenda for the next meeting, which is also on our internal wiki. While preparing the agenda, I will fill out the Discussed on the mailing list section and many of these topics feed into the new agenda. In this regards, the process has been working very well in the past year. I think the job of putting together the minutes works best when the President and Secretary work together like this. So this is an area of improvement. my main two issues as serving as secretary this year were being overzealous with people reviewing my note-taking (not a native english speaker, and the conference call phone line can be pretty messy at times), as well as reviewing the private sections. the first issue can be ascribed to me being in my first term; As I am putting together the agenda, I review and update the minutes when I notice ways to improve it. I think many board members do the same. Your English is quite good, and I rarely find myself correcting it. Meeting minutes seems crucial to run a public discussion between the board and its members as Germán has highlighted and it's not because no one asked that no one thought it was not important anymore. I agree with you, and if I'm serving as secretary on the next term, I'll make a point of addressing my obvious shortcoming of this term. It was ambitious of you to take on an officer position in your first term, and I think you should better recognize the good work you have been doing even in the face of constructive criticism. Brian ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
hi Allan; thanks for the question. On 25 May 2012 08:21, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote: 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? I think that, given the role covered by the Board (and by the Foundation itself), some detachment ought to be expected. what needs to improve, and I put myself down to being one that has to improve his own role, is better feedback to questions coming from the community. in the past year, the Board tried to be very proactive: Karen sent her agenda and reports on Planet GNOME, we held IRC meetings, and we are always listening on bo...@gnome.org. we had mixed results with those, sadly. the lack of stable minutes publishing can be a contributing factor, but that explains lack of feedback up to a certain point; even without minutes, the IRC meetings have been pretty sparse in attendance, and few points have been brought up for the IRC specific agenda. I guess it's a case of a negative feedback loop: we give out fewer talking points, the community participates less, we get less feedback so we have less to give back, and so on, and so forth. interrupting the cycle may just be a matter of increasing throughput from the Board, and trying to get more people involved. I can only say that, as far as I'm concerned, I can try and keep up with minutes publishing (and I assume that people will pester me more to keep my in line :-)). other than that, do other people have ideas on how to increase the feedback from the community at large? ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
[jumping into the thread at random] Dave Neary dne...@free.fr wrote: ... So I would try to have the minutes sent around ASAP. But as far as I could see, nobody was suffering enough yet to publicly ask whether it'd be possible to make things more (timely) public. I don't know if I count or not, but I have asked publicly several times this year about the status of things being mentioned in old board minutes - specifically the situation for 2013 and GUADEC/Desktop Summit. ... Thanks for all the responses. I agree with Emmanuele that some separation is to be expected, and I'm also happy to see the recent changes wrt Planet GNOME and Foundation membership. I'd really like that process to continue. Aside from what has already been mentioned, more blogging by the board could be one other way to increase its visibility. For me, the other thing that has come come out of this discussion is that visibility and integration is a product of the scope and mandate of the board. Right now, it feels like the board is largely in caretaker role - it does day-to-day administration, keeps things running and makes sure that essential tasks are taken care of. (Maybe I'm wrong about this - tell me if I am.) In that respect, it is unsurprising that the board isn't very visible. I would personally like to see the board be a more proactive organization, where the needs of the GNOME project are discussed, and initiatives intended to benefit it are instigated and managed. I'd like there be less 'we need someone to organise GUADEC' and more 'let's come up with ways to make GNOME an attractive place for hackers to work'. This would inevitably lead to more visibility and greater engagement by the wider community. However, I suspect that it is difficult for the board to adopt this role without more resources, since the essential routine tasks do need taking care of. Are there some routine tasks that the board could delegate? Does it need more in the way of administrative support? Allan -- IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com 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
Re: A question to the candidates
Hi Gil, Perhaps this link is relevant: http://makeplaylive.com/ I would add this questions to your thread: Do you think a similar venture for GNOME would make sense? How do you think this, or a similar project, can happen without leaving us bankrupt? Thanks! :-) Diego On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Gil Forcada gforc...@gnome.org wrote: Hi all, First of all thanks for running for this critical role on GNOME! My question is about hardware and contacts: The average user is not going to ever install its own operating system by itself, for them hardware and software come together and they die together, so a new version of Windows means a new laptop and so on, a new iPhone OS means a new iPhone hardware... So the crucial part here are ISV, contacting them, engaging with them and finally making them ship our great software to the end user. Is that something that you both find important and also will try to pursue if you are elected? Cheers, -- Gil Forcada [ca] guifi.net - una xarxa lliure que no para de créixer [en] guifi.net - a non-stopping free network bloc: http://gil.badall.net planet: http://planet.guifi.net ___ 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: A question to the candidates
2012/5/27 Gil Forcada gforc...@gnome.org: Hi all, First of all thanks for running for this critical role on GNOME! My question is about hardware and contacts: The average user is not going to ever install its own operating system by itself, for them hardware and software come together and they die together, so a new version of Windows means a new laptop and so on, a new iPhone OS means a new iPhone hardware... So the crucial part here are ISV, contacting them, engaging with them and finally making them ship our great software to the end user. Is that something that you both find important and also will try to pursue if you are elected? With the provisio that the board doesn't actually have a say in the technical direction. For GNOME OS to become a success we definitely need to get ISVs on board. To do that though we still have a long way to do. We will need a compelling, well documented SDK, development tools (MonoDevelop e.g. would be a nice place to start) and likely a whole bunch of additional tools like emulators. Aside that we'll need a means of deployment such as an app store and good packaging tools (glick and bockbuild seem close to being able to provide this, I know Banshee has used it to create deployable bundles on Linux and OS X). Relying on GNOME OS to package and make available every single application on a scale that can compete with the iOS App Store or Google Play would simply be madness so enabling ISVs to do that, and do it easily, would definitely be needed. This is going to be radically different from the model we are used to and I suspect we will have a lot of learning to do as well as some new friends to make to succeed. I think we still are years from deploying GNOME OS in any state that ISVs will be able to work with, but we can cultivate relationships already and get input as well as help to build all the foundations. So yes, I would start talking to select ISVs to get buy-in for deploying on GNOME as well as input to the kind of tools they would like to see. ISVs are also not just going to deploy on GNOME OS but across a range of systems and luckily we have friends that have experience with these challenges such as Xamarin, I think it would be wise to learn from them how to form a strategy that will ensure success long term. We are still a long way from competing with Android or iOS in this respect and I think it is to early to start a massive push. I would also happily raise funds to run more hackfests towards building the required foundational elements. I think it is important that we get an idea of what exactly it will require of us to become big players here and how we can get there. I think this is the most exciting part of GNOME right now and I would love to invest myself in making it happen to the full extend of the boards mandate. It's going to take years but I think GNOME is in a great place to offer a superior experience to users and ISVs alike. - David Cheers, -- Gil Forcada [ca] guifi.net - una xarxa lliure que no para de créixer [en] guifi.net - a non-stopping free network bloc: http://gil.badall.net planet: http://planet.guifi.net ___ 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: A question for the candidates
I'm going to reply here, because I really don't know how to answer the original email. On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 18:33 +0100, Allan Day wrote: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: ... Sometimes it can feel like the Board of Directors is a bit divorced from the rest of the GNOME project. I don't quite understand the question. The Board is not where technical decisions are made, it's not where applications or new dependencies are made. Yet it is still a governance body, and it is the only democratic one within GNOME. Only the Board can actually claim to represent the GNOME community. As the only democratic governance body in GNOME, I absolutely agree that, if push comes to shove, it's the board's responsibility to make the final decisions. But the board intentionally does not want to have to involve itself in most decisions. The board empowers other groups like the release team to work with the community and make decisions. If there is a serious dispute, then the board needs to act. But we should strive to have a working community where the board doesn't need to act. What were your expectations of the Board doing, and that they don't deliver on? My question was not guided by personal expectations. I'm interested in how the Board can enhance our community. I suppose I don't see the problem on this end, and if you don't have any personal expectations, it's hard for me to know what to address. I think the board members are largely active in the community in one way or another. I do think we could do better at being seen *outside* our community. We need to work better with partner organizations and vendors. We really ought to have good working relationships with companies that can put GNOME devices into users' hands. Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? I personally don't hear or see very much of what the board gets up to, and I don't feel like Foundation membership provides me with much in the way of additional influence. As a member of the board, you might be in a position to change that. If membership of the GNOME Foundation starts and ends with an annual vote, then it doesn't mean very much. If it is synonymous with membership of our community, and if it enables me to have a relationship with GNOME that I couldn't otherwise have, then it means a great deal. Is that something you care about? I tried for a while to continue the regular Foundation meetings. You were one of the very few people that regularly attended. Unless we had an interesting agenda item (e.g. future of the Desktop Summit), people didn't attend. I assume it's because they didn't have anything pressing to say. That's OK. I didn't have anything pressing to say either. In terms of what membership gets you, we've been trying to tie more privileges to Foundation membership, in part because it means we have more consistent rules for who can get what. I don't like looking at Foundation membership as something distinct from community membership. The Foundation is the community. We're just required to have a formal membership process for voting to abide by the laws that let us keep our non-profit status. -- Shaun ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question to the candidates
On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 11:21 +0200, Gil Forcada wrote: Hi all, First of all thanks for running for this critical role on GNOME! My question is about hardware and contacts: The average user is not going to ever install its own operating system by itself, for them hardware and software come together and they die together, so a new version of Windows means a new laptop and so on, a new iPhone OS means a new iPhone hardware... So the crucial part here are ISV, contacting them, engaging with them and finally making them ship our great software to the end user. Is that something that you both find important and also will try to pursue if you are elected? Hi Gil, I find this extremely important. It's what I talked about when I ran for the board last year. Clearly, not much has happened since. I do want to help make this happen, but I'm not sure where to begin. And I don't want to make promises I can't keep. -- Shaun ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
Bonjour :) On 25.05.2012 09:21, Allan Day wrote: 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? I wouldn't say I see a divorce. I'd say it feels a bit sluggish, based on what others already said: late minutes or lack of visible response. And yes, it is unpleasant if one doesn't know what is happening and thus being able to take influence. So I would try to have the minutes sent around ASAP. But as far as I could see, nobody was suffering enough yet to publicly ask whether it'd be possible to make things more (timely) public. Generally though, I consider it to be a good thing if the Board is not terribly visible as I consider the Board as something that keeps the community (and thus the Foundation) alive and moving and as long as it doesn't need to stir things up, it's running well, I'd say. Cheers, Tobi ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Board public IRC meetings - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
On 05/28/2012 05:59 AM, Shaun McCance wrote: Unless we had an interesting agenda item (e.g. future of the Desktop Summit), people didn't attend. I assume it's because they didn't have anything pressing to say. I have made an effort to attend those meetings and my problems at the times were numerous: - meetings badly announced if ever. Maybe making use of foundation mailing list and planet gnome systematically would help to get more people) - agenda not defined and seldom in line with what the board was discussing at the time. Not getting board meetings didn't help for sure - when questions were asked we would usually get of is not here so we don't know or oh, this is confidential so we cannot tell you. Trust that after a while you quickly lose your motivation to attend. I believe IRC meeting are an important part of the board communicating to its community and an effort must be made to announce and run those meetings regularly. Adding items to the agenda that the board is working on at the time will also definitely help raise attendance as well. Just the feeling of one foundation member. Fred ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Board meeting minutes - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
On 05/28/2012 07:29 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote: ne doesn't know what is happening and thus being able to take influence. So I would try to have the minutes sent around ASAP. But as far as I could see, nobody was suffering enough yet to publicly ask whether it'd be possible to make things more (timely) public. Again I guess we were spoiled by former board secretary in the previous years who was automatically emailing the meeting notes 2 weeks after the meeting. This year (2011-2012) minutes were published as follows: - Meeting of July 26, 2011 - publish on August 23rd : 1 month later - Meeting of August 9th, 2011 - published on October 18th: 2+ month later (publish together with 4 other meeting minutes). I personally even thought meetings were not happening anymore and considering the reactions I get when asking questions to the board I have just given up on asking for the time being. Note that I feel sending minutes is a board problem and not necessarily the secretary alone. I believe in getting things done rather than blaming individuals. One question was eventually asked when getting those minutes and the answer was _topic_in_question_ should be marked as private - again a typical sorry we can't tell you answer which I got quite often during public foundation IRC meetings. So at this stage you may start to understand why some members of the community feel that somehow the Board of Directors is a bit divorced from the rest of the GNOME project whereas GNOME project can mean its own community. Your mileage may vary. Meeting minutes seems crucial to run a public discussion between the board and its members as Germán has highlighted and it's not because no one asked that no one thought it was not important anymore. I will just quote Randy Pausch from his last lecture to conclude (Randy Pausch style, not mine): When you're screwing up and nobody says anything to you anymore, that means they've given up on you. Maybe that's something that both the current and new board should think about. Fred ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board public IRC meetings - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
I meant not getting board meeting MINUTES below. Sorry. On 05/28/2012 11:44 AM, Frederic Muller wrote: On 05/28/2012 05:59 AM, Shaun McCance wrote: Unless we had an interesting agenda item (e.g. future of the Desktop Summit), people didn't attend. I assume it's because they didn't have anything pressing to say. I have made an effort to attend those meetings and my problems at the times were numerous: - meetings badly announced if ever. Maybe making use of foundation mailing list and planet gnome systematically would help to get more people) - agenda not defined and seldom in line with what the board was discussing at the time. Not getting board meetings didn't help for sure - when questions were asked we would usually get of is not here so we don't know or oh, this is confidential so we cannot tell you. Trust that after a while you quickly lose your motivation to attend. I believe IRC meeting are an important part of the board communicating to its community and an effort must be made to announce and run those meetings regularly. Adding items to the agenda that the board is working on at the time will also definitely help raise attendance as well. Just the feeling of one foundation member. Fred ___ 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: Board meeting minutes - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
hi; On 28 May 2012 05:03, Frederic Muller fr...@gnome.org wrote: On 05/28/2012 07:29 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote: ne doesn't know what is happening and thus being able to take influence. So I would try to have the minutes sent around ASAP. But as far as I could see, nobody was suffering enough yet to publicly ask whether it'd be possible to make things more (timely) public. Again I guess we were spoiled by former board secretary in the previous years who was automatically emailing the meeting notes 2 weeks after the meeting. This year (2011-2012) minutes were published as follows: - Meeting of July 26, 2011 - publish on August 23rd : 1 month later - Meeting of August 9th, 2011 - published on October 18th: 2+ month later (publish together with 4 other meeting minutes). yes, this is my definite fault. [just a bit of backstory, here, also to help out eventual other candidates in case I'm not elected] the meeting minutes are written down during the meeting itself by using a collaborative editor, so that everyone on the meeting can actually review in real time what's being written (this also helps in case I could not hear or understand what was being said, or when I am talking about some topic/action item, in which case I cannot really take notes). after the meeting is over, the minute is published on the Foundation's restricted wiki space, for further review, in case I missed a private section, or I was being overzealous with one, as well as for clearing up some of the action items. after some time pass, the wiki page for the minutes is copied over to the public section of the Foundation's wiki space, and the contents are sent using an email. none of this is automated: Brian was just exceptionally good at sending out minutes every two weeks. :-) my main two issues as serving as secretary this year were being overzealous with people reviewing my note-taking (not a native english speaker, and the conference call phone line can be pretty messy at times), as well as reviewing the private sections. the first issue can be ascribed to me being in my first term; the second issue is the result of messing up a couple of times. I honestly didn't realize that there would be this many private discussions going on for multiple meetings. if somebody plans to be the secretary: be aware that it could happen. I personally even thought meetings were not happening anymore and considering the reactions I get when asking questions to the board I have just given up on asking for the time being. Note that I feel sending minutes is a board problem and not necessarily the secretary alone. I believe in getting things done rather than blaming individuals. again, it most definitely was my fault. One question was eventually asked when getting those minutes and the answer was _topic_in_question_ should be marked as private - again a typical sorry we can't tell you answer which I got quite often during public foundation IRC meetings. private topics surprised me as well; obviously, choosing the new ED has been a private topic in the past and even from the outside I knew that. I was unprepared at the time at the amount of sensitive topics that the Board is actually handling - it made me much more appreciative of the role of the Board. sadly, given the nature of these topics, releasing them in the public minutes (even after a longer embargo) may definitely not be possible; there are privacy concerns, as well as business concerns. other private topics have only an issue of timing: they could be moved to the public minutes after the discussion is over - though it'd require modifying the published minutes and then announcing the delta. Meeting minutes seems crucial to run a public discussion between the board and its members as Germán has highlighted and it's not because no one asked that no one thought it was not important anymore. I agree with you, and if I'm serving as secretary on the next term, I'll make a point of addressing my obvious shortcoming of this term. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Board meeting minutes - was (Re: A question for the candidates)
On Mon, 2012-05-28 at 06:06 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 28 May 2012 05:03, Frederic Muller fr...@gnome.org wrote: On 05/28/2012 07:29 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote: ne doesn't know what is happening and thus being able to take influence. So I would try to have the minutes sent around ASAP. But as far as I could see, nobody was suffering enough yet to publicly ask whether it'd be possible to make things more (timely) public. Again I guess we were spoiled by former board secretary in the previous years who was automatically emailing the meeting notes 2 weeks after the meeting. This year (2011-2012) minutes were published as follows: - Meeting of July 26, 2011 - publish on August 23rd : 1 month later - Meeting of August 9th, 2011 - published on October 18th: 2+ month later (publish together with 4 other meeting minutes). yes, this is my definite fault. [just a bit of backstory, here, also to help out eventual other candidates in case I'm not elected] the meeting minutes are written down during the meeting itself by using a collaborative editor, so that everyone on the meeting can actually review in real time what's being written (this also helps in case I could not hear or understand what was being said, or when I am talking about some topic/action item, in which case I cannot really take notes). after the meeting is over, the minute is published on the Foundation's restricted wiki space, for further review, in case I missed a private section, or I was being overzealous with one, as well as for clearing up some of the action items. after some time pass, the wiki page for the minutes is copied over to the public section of the Foundation's wiki space, and the contents are sent using an email. none of this is automated: Brian was just exceptionally good at sending out minutes every two weeks. :-) Indeed. That is the reason I blamed myself for not pestering for making them public (and not you). It was also your first term as director and secretary. If you become re-elected and keep the role as secretary, I will set a recurrent activity in my calendar to pester you every other week :-) -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
On 05/25/2012 09:21 AM, Allan Day wrote: 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? Having been off the board for a year, I can definitely say it sometimes looks like the board is doing nothing in the community, although it's actually does a lot, but one does not always notice. All the hackfests, conferences and fundraising have all at some point gone through the board. It's like a silent force of volunteers. I agree that we need to make the rest of the foundation be more active than just once a year when voting (apart from the volunteers not on the board that are involved with conferences, hackfests and fundraising), but apart from keeping up the foundation meetings on IRC (that very few people attend), I have few ideas on how to achieve that. On a related note, I'm very happy that two important pieces of whip and carrot have been introduced in order to make as many GNOME contributors as possible to become foundation members. The travel policy and the Planet GNOME aggregation. I think we can come up with more of these. - Andreas ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
A question for the candidates
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
Re: A question for the candidates
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 08:21 +0100, 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. I don't quite understand the question. The Board is not where technical decisions are made, it's not where applications or new dependencies are made. What were your expectations of the Board doing, and that they don't deliver on? Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
2012/5/25 Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com: Hi all, Thanks to all the candidates for stepping forward. It's fantastic that you are interested in doing this important work. Thank you. 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? I think the Board could be more visible, currently being on the outside I recently spent 3 weeks with non-communications with my board contact (Karen) during the late stages of planning a hackfest. Not knowing what to do or what the protocol was proved fairly distressing and I suspect not helpful to GNOME overall if such situations proves widespread. There are some minor things I would like to see, if you contact the board list, getting an acknowledge that your question was received and notification of when the next meeting where there will be time to debate it, if needed, is scheduled would help a lot. Likewise I don't think I have seen breakdowns of how Board members have voted on issues anywhere which I would personally consider valuable in terms of selecting a candidate to vote for (or to hold someone accountable). That being said, I think I would like to observe the Board more closely to see where it can do better in feeling as a more organic part of GNOME before making any big promises or suggestions. I only have some limited personal experience and haven't heard any reports of widespread problems. Perhaps it is an area where we need more input to identify our problems, so I would like to encourage people to step forward and tells us where it hurts. David ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: ... Sometimes it can feel like the Board of Directors is a bit divorced from the rest of the GNOME project. I don't quite understand the question. The Board is not where technical decisions are made, it's not where applications or new dependencies are made. Yet it is still a governance body, and it is the only democratic one within GNOME. Only the Board can actually claim to represent the GNOME community. What were your expectations of the Board doing, and that they don't deliver on? My question was not guided by personal expectations. I'm interested in how the Board can enhance our community. Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? I personally don't hear or see very much of what the board gets up to, and I don't feel like Foundation membership provides me with much in the way of additional influence. As a member of the board, you might be in a position to change that. If membership of the GNOME Foundation starts and ends with an annual vote, then it doesn't mean very much. If it is synonymous with membership of our community, and if it enables me to have a relationship with GNOME that I couldn't otherwise have, then it means a great deal. Is that something you care about? Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
board/ED contact (was Re: A question for the candidates)
On 2012-05-25 12:54, gnomeu...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/5/25 Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com: Hi all, Thanks to all the candidates for stepping forward. It's fantastic that you are interested in doing this important work. Thank you. 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? I think the Board could be more visible, currently being on the outside I recently spent 3 weeks with non-communications with my board contact (Karen) during the late stages of planning a hackfest. Not knowing what to do or what the protocol was proved fairly distressing and I suspect not helpful to GNOME overall if such situations proves widespread. Since you mention this on Foundation list I'd also like to apologize for this here - your requests came at a time I was dealing with health issues and I should have been more communicative about that. I believe everything was resolved with adequate time but I'm sorry that you found it at all distressing. (On the specific issues at hand, I thought I'd wrapped up the outstanding portion directly with Udesh, but we can definitely talk more about it privately if you'd like.) I know you also say that you haven't heard any reports of widespread problems, but this is a good opportunity to say here to everyone that if there is some request you are waiting on, please do not hesitate to ping me on IRC (I'm karenesq) or to reach out to others if you feel like there's something that's getting dropped. The board's email (with me and Rosanna) is board-l...@gnome.org and you can always cc that, which will get to everyone! For me personally, I prefer more contact - you won't irritate me and I feel terrible when things slip through the cracks :) karen There are some minor things I would like to see, if you contact the board list, getting an acknowledge that your question was received and notification of when the next meeting where there will be time to debate it, if needed, is scheduled would help a lot. Likewise I don't think I have seen breakdowns of how Board members have voted on issues anywhere which I would personally consider valuable in terms of selecting a candidate to vote for (or to hold someone accountable). That being said, I think I would like to observe the Board more closely to see where it can do better in feeling as a more organic part of GNOME before making any big promises or suggestions. I only have some limited personal experience and haven't heard any reports of widespread problems. Perhaps it is an area where we need more input to identify our problems, so I would like to encourage people to step forward and tells us where it hurts. David ___ 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: A question for the candidates
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 18:33 +0100, Allan Day wrote: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net wrote: ... Sometimes it can feel like the Board of Directors is a bit divorced from the rest of the GNOME project. I don't quite understand the question. The Board is not where technical decisions are made, it's not where applications or new dependencies are made. Yet it is still a governance body, and it is the only democratic one within GNOME. Only the Board can actually claim to represent the GNOME community. What were your expectations of the Board doing, and that they don't deliver on? My question was not guided by personal expectations. I'm interested in how the Board can enhance our community. Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? I personally don't hear or see very much of what the board gets up to, and I don't feel like Foundation membership provides me with much in the way of additional influence. As a member of the board, you might be in a position to change that. On one hand, the meeting minutes should be a good way to know to be aware of what the board is doing (or not doing). In my first year, I pestered to make them public as soon as possible (3 or 4 days after the meeting). IMO, late minutes are meaningless. I blame myself for having the time and energy in the last year to pester the new secretary, but definitively that is something that any member can do and influence. The meetings are every two weeks and any member can add topics the agenda. On the other hand, in the last years the board has been trying to empower teams and people rather than centralizing power. For instance, the hackfest organization process is straightforward and it does not have be an activity proposed/organized by the board anymore. The board acts as helper of the contributors who want to do more and a bridge with companies when needed. I think there is room for improvement, but I will not spoil the candidates :-) -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: A question for the candidates
Hi, On 05/25/2012 09:24 PM, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 18:33 +0100, Allan Day wrote: Why do you think the Board of Directors is divorced from the project? I personally don't hear or see very much of what the board gets up to, and I don't feel like Foundation membership provides me with much in the way of additional influence. As a member of the board, you might be in a position to change that. On one hand, the meeting minutes should be a good way to know to be aware of what the board is doing (or not doing). In my first year, I pestered to make them public as soon as possible (3 or 4 days after the meeting). IMO, late minutes are meaningless. I blame myself for having the time and energy in the last year to pester the new secretary, but definitively that is something that any member can do and influence. The meetings are every two weeks and any member can add topics the agenda. I must admit, minute posting has been pretty lax this year. There have been a few occasions when a backlog of 3 or 4 meetings' worth has come out at once. I used to read the minutes every meeting to see if there was anything where I might be able to provide some historical context or help, and I have been doing that less this year, purely because (as you say German) late minutes are useless - by the time you comment on them, the decision's been made, announced, and everyone's moved on. And since the agenda doesn't get posted here before the meeting, it's hard to even know what the board are working on at any given time. Also, with the long actions list on the minutes, it's hard to know where things are moving, where they've been dropped, where they're on standby... for example, we still haven't seen an announcement of what's happening for next year's conference. I think that the transparency of operation is definitely something the next board can work on. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org Jabber: nea...@gmail.com ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates : money !
Hi Lionel, Brian has already given a good answer about fundraising. I would like to offer some ideas from my point of view. 1. We could sell GNOME merchandise on GNOME stores/websites in different countries around the world. For example we can host a GNOME store in China using Taobao[1], the largest shopping website in China. Mozilla launched its Mozilla store on Taobao last month[2]. The profits form this would be transferred back to the GNOME Foundation for use as sponsorship money for events in China or elsewhere. 2. We can encourage more local companies to join the GNOME Foundation Advistory board, especially Asian countries. I personally know many local companies using various GNOME technologies. They have not joined or contributed because of various reasons including language barriers and simply not knowing how to contribute at all. 3. Continual promotion of the Friends of GNOME program, especially to our regular users. We can do this through local user groups and local communities. We should translate our promotional materials for Friends of GNOME to to allow increased exposure to non English speakers. People will be proud of their personal donations to the GNOME Foundation; they simply are not aware of the Friends of GNOME program. [1]www.taobao.com [2]http://firefox001.taobao.com/ Thanks, Emily 2010/6/2 Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com Lionel: I've a question about GNOME business model and sustanability. As we have seen with the fundrising to hire a sysadmin, money is often a blocking point. The current business model seems to be donations. Actually, The GNOME Foundation acquires money from several sources: - Advisory Board fees - Sponsorship for particular events or programs - Profit from events (such as GUADEC) - Donations (such as Friends of GNOME and the upcoming mobile donations program being discussed on the marketing list) The GNOME Foundation has invested a fair amount of effort in the Friends of GNOME program to increase donations and with good success. However, donations are a small overall percentage of revenue. Also note that The GNOME Foundation is a charity. So, we do need to ensure that money that we receive is used in ways that are aligned with The GNOME Foundation charter. This does restrict how The GNOME Foundation can raise and spend money to a degree. Do you think that donations are good ? Good enough ? With more money, the GNOME Foundation can do more exciting things, so the GNOME Foundation is always looking at ways to improve how money is raised. In the past year, the GNOME Foundation doubled the advisory board fees and this was a significant step making the organization more profitable. Do you plan to work on this business model ? Do you have any proposals ? There is a lot of work going on to improve how the GNOME Foundation raises money: - Statistics show that most money received via Friends of GNOME comes from GNOME users, not people in the GNOME development community. The GNOME Foundation is planning to start a campaign to more effectively reach out to users to make them aware of the Friends of GNOME program, and consider donating. - The board is currently working to develop a program to allow companies and organizations to donate money. This program would be directed at organizations that are not currently advisory board members. This could be something like a Friends of GNOME program for organizations instead of individuals. This could, for example, provide a link exchange, advertising, mention as a sponsor of an event, or other forms of recognition as an incentive to donate money. - By making events more profitable. We are constantly working with event organizers to encourage them to find ways to make events more profitable, or at least sustainable. - Typically sponsorship money that the GNOME Foundation receives is in exchange for some service, such as by organizing a hackfest to get work done in an area that benefits (directly or indirectly) those organizations interested in providing sponsorship. With GNOME 3 approaching, the GNOME Foundation has been working hard to organize a rich set of hackfests to focus on work that needs to get done for GNOME 3 to be successful. The GNOME Foundation needs to continue working hard in this area. However, more can be done. For example, the GNOME Foundation received some sponsorship money last year to upgrade bugzilla. The GNOME Foundation needs to continue to find ways to provide services that will continue to bring in sponsorship money. - Currently the GNOME Foundation is organizing a Women's Outreach Program. Getting more involved with organizing humanitarian events like this could open the doors to finding new sponsors with an interest in promoting humanitarian causes. - Grants are another possible source of revenue. We have done some considerable work preparing ourselves to
Re: Question for the candidates : money !
On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 15:11 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote: Lionel: I've a question about GNOME business model and sustanability. As we have seen with the fundrising to hire a sysadmin, money is often a blocking point. The current business model seems to be donations. Actually, The GNOME Foundation acquires money from several sources: - Advisory Board fees - Sponsorship for particular events or programs - Profit from events (such as GUADEC) - Donations (such as Friends of GNOME and the upcoming mobile donations program being discussed on the marketing list) snip awesome explanations And I'll add that there's some opportunities around referal and advertising revenue on the desktop itself (some of that revenue unfortunately being snatched by distributors), as well as trying to get some (recurring) donations from projects that depend on us (say, Mozilla Co. for the Linux related work). Cheers ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates : money !
Lionel: I've a question about GNOME business model and sustanability. As we have seen with the fundrising to hire a sysadmin, money is often a blocking point. The current business model seems to be donations. Actually, The GNOME Foundation acquires money from several sources: - Advisory Board fees - Sponsorship for particular events or programs - Profit from events (such as GUADEC) - Donations (such as Friends of GNOME and the upcoming mobile donations program being discussed on the marketing list) The GNOME Foundation has invested a fair amount of effort in the Friends of GNOME program to increase donations and with good success. However, donations are a small overall percentage of revenue. Also note that The GNOME Foundation is a charity. So, we do need to ensure that money that we receive is used in ways that are aligned with The GNOME Foundation charter. This does restrict how The GNOME Foundation can raise and spend money to a degree. Do you think that donations are good ? Good enough ? With more money, the GNOME Foundation can do more exciting things, so the GNOME Foundation is always looking at ways to improve how money is raised. In the past year, the GNOME Foundation doubled the advisory board fees and this was a significant step making the organization more profitable. Do you plan to work on this business model ? Do you have any proposals ? There is a lot of work going on to improve how the GNOME Foundation raises money: - Statistics show that most money received via Friends of GNOME comes from GNOME users, not people in the GNOME development community. The GNOME Foundation is planning to start a campaign to more effectively reach out to users to make them aware of the Friends of GNOME program, and consider donating. - The board is currently working to develop a program to allow companies and organizations to donate money. This program would be directed at organizations that are not currently advisory board members. This could be something like a Friends of GNOME program for organizations instead of individuals. This could, for example, provide a link exchange, advertising, mention as a sponsor of an event, or other forms of recognition as an incentive to donate money. - By making events more profitable. We are constantly working with event organizers to encourage them to find ways to make events more profitable, or at least sustainable. - Typically sponsorship money that the GNOME Foundation receives is in exchange for some service, such as by organizing a hackfest to get work done in an area that benefits (directly or indirectly) those organizations interested in providing sponsorship. With GNOME 3 approaching, the GNOME Foundation has been working hard to organize a rich set of hackfests to focus on work that needs to get done for GNOME 3 to be successful. The GNOME Foundation needs to continue working hard in this area. However, more can be done. For example, the GNOME Foundation received some sponsorship money last year to upgrade bugzilla. The GNOME Foundation needs to continue to find ways to provide services that will continue to bring in sponsorship money. - Currently the GNOME Foundation is organizing a Women's Outreach Program. Getting more involved with organizing humanitarian events like this could open the doors to finding new sponsors with an interest in promoting humanitarian causes. - Grants are another possible source of revenue. We have done some considerable work preparing ourselves to pursue them. Building a community of volunteers to help with this has been slow going, but our hope is that we can make grants more a part of our revenue generation in time. http://live.gnome.org/Grants Brian ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates : money !
Hi, El mar, 01-06-2010 a las 15:11 -0500, Brian Cameron escribió: Do you plan to work on this business model ? Do you have any proposals ? - The board is currently working to develop a program to allow companies and organizations to donate money. This program would be directed at organizations that are not currently advisory board members. This could be something like a Friends of GNOME program for organizations instead of individuals. This could, for example, provide a link exchange, advertising, mention as a sponsor of an event, or other forms of recognition as an incentive to donate money. Brian refers to this email in marketing list: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/marketing-list/2010-June/msg1.html Basically we want to define new roles that can be taken by smaller companies or organizations so they can donate and get visibility for it. Likely there are a lot of companies that would like to associate to GNOME if they had a clear chance. Comments welcome in marketing-list! ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
One other question for the candidates
Here's a question that I would like the candidates to answer. What do you think GNOME should do to support the broader cause of free/libre software, and the freedom of computer users? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: One other question for the candidates
On 06/09/2009 10:34 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: Here's a question that I would like the candidates to answer. What do you think GNOME should do to support the broader cause of free/libre software, and the freedom of computer users? I see one thing GNOME should *continue* to do: improve the awesome user experience, while still expanding the user base and maintaining GNOME status of Free/Libre Software. I think today, when it comes to GNOME, it is the applications that matters. There is no doubt that GNOME is Free Software, but what matters to the users is to get things done, more than anything else. Hub ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates [Was: Re: Money spending, questions for the candidates]
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 18:42 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: Hi, As warned about earlier in this election (by someone with better foresight than I have), when there isn't an organized call for questions people will fire off zillions of them at random. This puts an unreasonable burden on not only the candidates who feel obligated to spend time responding to an unbounded and haphazard collection of interrogations, but also similarly burdens the general community with too much email. You also find people asking additional questions based on misunderstandings due to the fact that they simply weren't able to keep up with all the other email (I have seen this in multiple threads, not just this one.) What will you as a candidate do to make sure we avoid this mess in the future? This was a simple issue with the Membership Committee practice this year. It could still be fixed this year too, but seems questions keep coming as long as voting is open :). Anyway, for next year, MC will make sure this doesn't happen, and board will make sure to double check it! behdad Elijah [With apologies to Philip--it wasn't really his fault since no one asked the general membership for questions in an organized fashion...but while his email probably makes some interesting points it very much qualifies as excessively long and spurred my comments.] -- 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 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates [Was: Re: Money spending, questions for the candidates]
quote who=Elijah Newren What will you as a candidate do to make sure we avoid this mess in the future? Work with the Membership Committee to document their practices and make sure they perform them more consistently in future years. During the current term, I have already made that you won't have to deal with this again for 18 months. :-) - Jeff -- GNOME.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australia http://live.gnome.org/Melbourne2008 Itanium: A synthetic market-group tested plasticised square. - Jamie Wilkinson ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates [Was: Re: Money spending, questions for the candidates]
Hey On 11/30/07, Elijah Newren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, (...) What will you as a candidate do to make sure we avoid this mess in the future? I can only think of asking for question much sooner or proposing some topics under which to fill questions. But honestly, I don't know if anything could guarantee people participating more *before* this period. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Question for the candidates [Was: Re: Money spending, questions for the candidates]
quote who=Jeff Waugh Work with the Membership Committee to document their practices and make sure they perform them more consistently in future years. Miss one word and it changes the entire tone... and help make sure. They have done a great job this year, though as a result of numerous changes to the volunteer team a couple of things have been dropped on the floor (such as question gathering from the community and linking to the election rules in the announcement). Easy to fix for the future. It's generally a pretty thankless task, so... thanks to the membership committee! :-) - Jeff -- linux.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australiahttp://lca2008.linux.org.au/ You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, and know when to run. - Kenny Rogers, The Gambler ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
