On Monday, August 19, 2013 18:08:00 John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Monday, August 19, 2013 12:49 -0700 SM
>
> wrote:
> >...
> >
> >> First, I note that, in some organizations (including some
> >> large ones), someone might be working on an open source
> >> project one month and a proprietary one th
--On Monday, August 19, 2013 12:49 -0700 SM
wrote:
>...
>> First, I note that, in some organizations (including some
>> large ones), someone might be working on an open source
>> project one month and a proprietary one the next, or maybe
>> both
>> concurrently. Would it be appropriate for suc
Hi John,
At 06:11 19-08-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
I think this is bogus and takes us down an undesirable path.
Ok.
First, I note that, in some organizations (including some large
ones), someone might be working on an open source project one
month and a proprietary one the next, or maybe bot
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > But my point was more that "open source" is meaningless, and not what I
> > think we're missing/need. I agree we need more developers (at least in
> RAI
> > it would help), but whether the things they develop are open source or
> not
> >
On Monday, August 19, 2013 09:35:25 Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:04 PM, SM wrote:
> > On reading the second paragraph of the above message I see that you and I
> > might have a common objective. You mentioned that you don't know how to
> > do that beyond what is done now. I sugg
On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:04 PM, SM wrote:
> On reading the second paragraph of the above message I see that you and I
> might have a common objective. You mentioned that you don't know how to do
> that beyond what is done now. I suggested a rate for people with an open
> source affiliation. I
--On Sunday, August 18, 2013 17:04 -0700 SM
wrote:
>> I'd love to get more developers in general to participate -
>> whether they're open or closed source doesn't matter. But I
>> don't know how to do that, beyond what we do now. The email
>> lists are free and open. The physical meetings
Hi Hadriel,
At 05:33 18-08-2013, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
Define "open source developers". Technically quite a lot of
developers at my employer develop "open source", as do many at many
of the corporations which send people to the IETF. Heck, even I
personally submit code to Wireshark now and th
In article <01672754-1c4f-465b-b737-7e82dc5b3...@oracle.com> you write:
>
>I've been told, though obviously I don't know, that the costs are
>proportional. I assume it's not literally a "if we get
>one additional person, it costs an additional $500". But I assume SM wasn't
>proposing to get jus
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Hadriel Kaplan
wrote:
>
> On Aug 18, 2013, at 5:21 AM, SM wrote:
>
> > 1. If the IETF is serious about running code (see RFC 6982) it would try
> to encourage open source developers to participate more effectively in the
> IETF.
>
>
> Define "open source developer
I've been told, though obviously I don't know, that the costs are proportional.
I assume it's not literally a "if we get one additional person, it costs an
additional $500". But I assume SM wasn't proposing to get just one or a few
more "open source developer" attendees. If we're talking abo
--On Sunday, 18 August, 2013 08:33 -0400 Hadriel Kaplan
wrote:
>...
> And it does cost the IETF lots of money to host the physical
> meetings, and that cost is directly proportional to the number
> of physical attendees. More attendees = more cost.
I had promised myself I was finished with th
On Aug 18, 2013, at 5:21 AM, SM wrote:
> 1. If the IETF is serious about running code (see RFC 6982) it would try to
> encourage open source developers to participate more effectively in the IETF.
Define "open source developers". Technically quite a lot of developers at my
employer develop
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 2:51 PM, SM wrote:
> Hi Hadriel,
> At 12:31 16-08-2013, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>
>> I may be misunderstanding you, but I'm proposing we charge "large
>> corporations with large travel budgets" slightly *more* than others.[1]
>> I'm not suggesting an overhaul of the system.
Hi Hadriel,
At 12:31 16-08-2013, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
I may be misunderstanding you, but I'm proposing we charge "large
corporations with large travel budgets" slightly *more* than
others.[1] I'm not suggesting an overhaul of the system. I'm not
proposing they get more attention, or more wei
15 matches
Mail list logo
