Hi Benjamin,
You raise an interesting point.
Back when I was freelancing as an audio engineer I used to pay for this
kind of cover myself and it costed around £130 a year for an individual.
The work I do for my charity (Scottish based) is covered by the charity as
are our disclosures (for working
I do not think Jan is thinking coherently on this (and likewise I
absolutely empathise with your concerns Benjamin) Civil law is not black
and white and it is totally by landmark cases of which there are none to
refer to in this case that we know of. Ultimately, none of us know if the
wording on th
>
>
> I highly doubt being an OPW mentor will increase the likelihood of my
> ending up in court.
>
I think that is not in question here. The point is that if a big
organisation who can afford to get sued is not willing to take a risk, why
should an individual volunteer be *explicitly* asked to do
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Karen Sandler
wrote:
> On 2014-11-09 20:23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 18:48 +0000, Magdalen Berns wrote:
>> The challenges the OPW organisers face is in figuring out how to
>> encourage projects and mentors
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Karen Sandler
wrote:
> On 2014-11-10 05:45, Magdalen Berns wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Karen Sandler
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2014-11-09 20:23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 18:48 +000
Hi Jan,
Ok Yan, I absolutely see actually where you are coming from now and yay,
for human rights. I suspect it's quite similar in the UK now you mention
it. Sorry, for having seemed dismissive, I should have given what you said
more regard. With that said, if GNOME were to be put in a situation w
Hi Fabiano,
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>
> I'd like to raise two suggestions here.
> 1) I have the feeling that people would feel more welcome to donate if
> they could see how much money was already donated for this cause/how
> many people have already contribute
Hi Kat,
At last update, it was USD 21093.90
>
WOW!
I am seeing rumours all over the web that Groupon are dropping the idea to
use GNOME as a trademark already, is there any truth in this or is it just
a tactical move to reduce the impact of the fundraiser? If it is the latter
it might be worth s
> At last count, the number was up to USD 87693.47.
>
It seems Shakespeare was quite wrong about the insignificance of "a name",
after all... It would be great to see that money not have to go on Lawyers
fees, I must say. One has to wonder why they didn't just use a trademark
search first and why
Hi,
Right. So, to recap: those who are objecting have never used a credit/debit
card to buy stuff or get cash out the wall?
What seems to be being suggested by some members of the community here, is
that it's physically possible to achieve certain everything we wish to do
in the technological wor
Oh dear.
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:24 AM, Alexandre Franke
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio
> wrote:
> >>> Can you be more explicit about what you mean with "tools used to do
> >>> your/the bank transactions
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > Are we considering not linking to this fundraiser because it is hosted
> on a
> > website that uses non-free software?
>
> That depends what you mean by "considering".
> Several people are arguing vigorously against that idea,
> but
>
>
> The issue at hand is what to say to the public.
>
Which is a policy issue... GNOME are responsible for establishing its
policies and GNOME has not seen fit to establish any concrete policy on
this (for whatever reason). Not establishing concrete policy and guidance
to cover these sorts of re
Hi all,
Whist this is a bit entertaining, I think we can all see where it is
headed... On balance, there really is only one practical reason to bring up
the past and that is for the sake of being able to reliably anticipate the
future. So, I have to urge people again to try to move the discussion
>
> If crowdfunding was a service that the GNOME foundation offered it's
> members, I would be in favor of that. However, as it stands today, I
> believe this would cause undue burden on the board.
>
It's hard to say without thrashing it out but I definitely think it's worth
thrashing it out, othe
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:12 AM, meg ford wrote:
> Hi,
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Christian Hergert
> wrote:
>
>> On 01/05/2015 03:44 PM, Magdalen Berns wrote:
>> > To elaborate on the point about fundraisers a little further: Also
>> > though I have
> I understood you to be talking about labelling links as non-free even on
> wiki pages and Planet GNOME. Were you only talking about links to
> fundraising pages?
>
In physics, problem solving is seen as a case of starting with the most
simple model of a given system, stating assumptions to accou
>
> First, there's a lot of talk (here and the earlier thread) that loosely
> equivocates fundraising with crowdfunding. They're not the same. To tell
> a project that it should simply accept donations rather than use a
> crowdfunding platform is a false equivocation. Crowdfunding's mixture of
>
>
> > The point about that really is that the recent campaign seems to have
> > demonstrated that in principle, GNOME already has the infrastructure
> which
> > could allow them to accept money for any given crowdfunding campaign on
> > behalf of community driven projects (and any general fundraisi
>
> I wasn't confused, and I wasn't speaking about the recent Groupon
> fundraiser. There's been a few calls here for free software alternatives
> to Indiegogo as well as GNOME becoming involved with those alternatives.
> Many of the proposed alternatives were not crowdfunding and shouldn't be
> t
>
> > I understand that you can't move the campaign now. But can you post a
> > bitcoin address, and invite people to send money that way if they
> > don't want to run nonfree JS code?
>
> I've added a section to the campaign borrowed from crowdsupply.
>
It's great this is resolved.
> As for bi
> > The same set up as what?
>
> Something similar to IndieGoGo.
>
It does not need to be similar to indieGoGo. Let's review:
GNOME is a charity. IndiGoGo is a business. They do not have the same tax
set up, no. As far as I am aware, they do not need to have the same tax set
up either. GNOME does
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > Now, to the subject of whether GNOME should or should not link to
> non-free
> > websites
>
> The expression "nonfree website" is one we do not use, because it is
> not clear what that would mean. Web sites raise various kinds of
>
The issue at hand is not a matter of endorsement. At least, not in the
> usual sense of the word.
>
I am not sure I agree.
It seems like what we are talking about here is whether or not we should be
using certain services and advertising that we use those services on GNOME
websites.
If a link s
>
> Because the issue is so specific, it is ethically simple -- it's wrong
> to recommend the operation if the operation requires running nonfree
> software (including JS code).
>
That makes sense. It is a lot easier than dealing with sites that run
non-free software but who don't require it so I
I think you have defined it well.
> I would expect that these potential problem cases occur rarely.
> Can you recall any others besides this one?
>
Some others have mentioned social networking site links e.g. facebook et
al. Though I am not sure this would apply to all of the ones listed because
Hi Richard,
>
> I believe it is possible to view many Facebook pages without running
> JS. (I am about to verify that.)
According to the libreJS plugin you pointed us to earlier on in the
discussion, all javascript that facebook tries to run, is offending. When
LibreJS blocks the scripts it rep
Hi Jeff,
I am genuinely not sure whether GNOME has this already but given that the
board has stated it is quite overstretched by the current workload on them.
I get the impression some tasks tend to be delegated more on a need to
know/do basis and that this may be contributing to a heavy workload
Hi,
At this stage, I regretfully have urge anyone who would preference lashing
out on twitter with their frustrations about the existence of this thread,
to consider engaging in a reasoned way on this dedicated thread about their
concerns. Whist throwing bigotry at me may seem like the easiest way
>
> Generally I think that the people who are not on board understand what is
> being discussed and simply disagree with certain aspects of it. I know that
> is the case with me. I contribute to FOSS, etc, but I do not always share
> the same ethics as the FSF. My impression is that that is common.
>
>
> Define "Many" ? I personally support FSF's ethics in principle, please
>> don't speak for all of us.
>
>
> I think it's somewhat split, but sort of having everyone in the foundation
> state their stance on it, I don't know how 'many' could be defined.
>
There are people who are in a position
>
> It’s frankly pretty difficult for me at least to distinguish between
> Richard-speaking-as-Richard-alone and Richard-speaking-as-the-FSF, and he
> never makes the distinction himself. Does he hold some viewpoint that the
> FSF does not, or vice versa? That would actually be news to me.
>
Perso
>
>
> Define "Many" ? I personally support FSF's ethics in principle, please
>> don't speak for all of us.
>
>
> I think it's somewhat split, but sort of having everyone in the foundation
> state their stance on it, I don't know how 'many' could be defined.
>
The elected members of the Board of Di
Hi Emmanuele,
> these roles already exist, and are generally assigned to the elected
> directors during the first board meeting.
>
Seems a bit unorthodox, but as long as they're willing and able to manage
the additional workload I can't see anything wrong with that. :-)
currently, Andrea Veri i
015 at 5:55 PM, Magdalen Berns
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the information. I notice that there is no contact information
> > for any of the teams or links to indicate who they are and what their
> > currently working on. It seems unlikely that someone would easily be
> able to
> &
> the officers do not strictly need to be directors, i.e. the Board may
> appoint anybody to hold those offices after a vote, but it's the Board
> that votes, not the general membership of the Foundation; the members
> of the Foundation elect the Board, though.
>
I can't see any reason why that co
Karen, Marina:
Can you elaborate on your plans for OP? It seems unclear whether you intend
to continue to lean on the infrastructure of larger organisations like
GNOME or SFC or whether you intend to create a concrete autonomous model
for OP in the long run and these things are just necessary step
+1
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Oliver Propst
wrote:
> I hope a board member step-up and sign the agreement for GNOME.
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Tobias Mueller
> wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 11:51:41AM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >> There's a website to encourage
> On 02/04/2015 08:25 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > I'm not sure what it rhymes with but that caught my eye as well. The
> > current name might be more effective.
>
> Let's not trivialize this into a discussion of a name.
>
Likewise: that was obviously a p.s., not the main context I was concer
>
> > Karen, Marina:
> >
> > Can you elaborate on your plans for OP? It seems unclear whether you
> intend
> > to continue to lean on the infrastructure of larger organisations like
> GNOME
> > or SFC or whether you intend to create a concrete autonomous model for
> OP in
> > the long run and these
>
> One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
> to be an invitation rather than an application.
> If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
> fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
> of someone else who can suppo
> On 12 February 2015 at 13:42, Magdalen Berns
> wrote:
> >> One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
> >> to be an invitation rather than an application.
> >> If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
>
> >> >> One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the
> process
> >> >> to be an invitation rather than an application.
> >> >> If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
> >> >> fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
> >> >>
>
> > I suggest we just make the rules much clearer to people on the outreach
> > pages by clarifying what "non-trivial" actually means. GSoC/OPW interns
> are
> > told to make more contributions after their 3 month internship before
> > applying. That suggests that the contributions they make over
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
> > On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
> > > I think you bring up an interesting point, but I also like the idea
> > > that foundation membership is not a badge you e
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 09:46 +0000, Magdalen Berns wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
> > &
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:20:21AM +0000, Magdalen Berns wrote:
> > It doesn't make a difference. The bylaws are the rules which regulate the
> > GNOME Foundation. GNOME's bylaws state the rules on membership
>
>
> > This is not a complicated process, it is fairly clear and transparent
> > (especially when compared with the alternative). What is the problem with
> > using It?
> There is none.
>
> > At the moment we are talking about whether it is justifiable to tell all
> > successful interns that they ar
>
> >
> > > I don't read "all successful interns are not eligible for membership"
> > > there which is what you claimed.
> > >
> >
> > This is not what we were discussing in the thread.
> I was under the impression that Magdalen is. She claimed that we're
> telling
> "all succesful interns that th
> > If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore
> bylaws
> > that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are free
> to
> > make a case for that. California law probably would probably override
> that
> > idea, though.
>
> I tried to nicest way to let you
>
> This policy came about after I encouraged interns who were 2/3rd of the
> way through their internship in 2012 to apply for the Foundation
> membership. The membership committee preferred that interns have a chance
> to figure out their level of participation in GNOME after the internship
> bef
>
> >> What you are suggesting would be accepting every single intern
> >> regardless of this person being really interested and passionate about
> >> joining the Foundation. That will probably lead to a wider membership
> >> base for sure but how long these people are going to really stay
> >> aro
>
>
> > A while back we ran a $20K privacy campaign. A while later there was a
> > discussion about what to do with the funds. Did we ever decide what to
> > do with these?
> Nope.
> I proposed to fund interns to work on security and privacy related projects
> but the idea was rejected.
>
This see
>
> >> One of the main requirements of gaining
> >> Foundation Membership is being active within the community for a
> >> little while *after* the internship has ended to demonstrate the fact
> >> there's a real interest staying around and contributing to the
> >> Project.
> >
> >
> > This is a pra
>
> >> > A while back we ran a $20K privacy campaign. A while later there was a
> >> > discussion about what to do with the funds. Did we ever decide what to
> >> > do with these?
> >> Nope.
> >> I proposed to fund interns to work on security and privacy related
> >> projects
> >> but the idea was
>
> > > > If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore
> > > bylaws
> > > > that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are
> free
> > > to
> > > > make a case for that. California law probably would probably override
> > > that
> > > > idea, though.
> >
>
> > This is something I believe could happen if an amendment were to be
> > proposed with compelling evidence to support it so we are able to take an
> > informed vote on it. At the moment the issue is that a decision which
> > overrides the bylaws has already been made in the establishment of th
>
>
> > [...]
> > It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support the
> > hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested solution
> will
> > address that problem in a representative way.
>
> Please, go ahead, collect the evidence and present it here.
>
I am goin
> > >
> > >
> > > > [...]
> > > > It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support
> the
> > > > hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested
> solution
> > > will
> > > > address that problem in a representative way.
> > >
> > > Please, go ahead, collect the ev
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:28:58PM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
> > This seems like a nice idea. Why was it rejected?
> The best argument I remember was that interns wouldn't produce
> as high quality results as, for example, calling for bids.
>
> But as it has
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke <
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Luciana Fujii
> wrote:
> > - What is the impact of having people joining the Foundation and
> > vanishing later?
>
> They gain voting ability when they shouldn't. The board
>
> > Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
> > months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
> > perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
> > the decisions are public as well.
>
> Sorry for prolonging this thread, but
> > Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
>> > months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
>> > perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
>> > the decisions are public as well.
>>
>> Sorry for prolonging this thread, b
>
> > On the face of it this seems to be purely about
> > reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
> > means less work for them).
>
> On the face of it, this statement is fairly offensive for the
> membership committee.
You've read the email that Andrea sent about
> > The membership can correct me if I'm wrong, but one thing that's not
> > been said so far is that the "N months before accepting a member" is
> > not really special to interns.
> Also correct.
>
In that case, what is the period of time is considered acceptable for
non-interns to have contribut
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Alexandre Franke <
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Magdalen Berns
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke
> > wrote:
> >> The membership can correct me if I&
>
> > Again, a brilliant question. On the face of it this seems to be purely
> about
> > reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
> > means less work for them). However there are clearly some implications
> which
> > affect our democratic processes. The question of
> > Further to that, on looking at some of the recent membership data
> > gathered so far with specific regard to the interns, I have to say, it
> > does seem like a few interns have been significantly undervaluing
> > their own contributions by waiting much longer to apply than seems
> > appropria
Let's be real: this is pure drama and it is more than slightly ironic that
the original topic of this thread has been completely derailed by those
seeking to censor "off-topic" discussion...
For the record, I agree 100% with the moderators - that censorship of any
card carrying member would be tot
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Yosef Or Boczko wrote:
> Hey Richard,
>
> בתאריך ש', אפר 4, 2015 בשעה 5:47 PM, Richard Stallman כתב:
>
>>
>> There are people on the list who do not know this. Mentioning this
>> point twice a year, in a short polite message, is useful and is no
>> reason for any
Congrats on the new job, Tobi.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Tobias Mueller
wrote:
> Hey folks.
>
> My affiliation has changed.
> I'm now with Huawei.
>
> Cheers,
> Tobi
> ___
> foundation-announce mailing list
> foundation-annou...@gnome.org
> htt
congrats
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Ekaterina Gerasimova <
kittykat3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> my affiliation is changing to Collabora Ltd. from today.
>
> Kat
>
> ___
> foundation-announce mailing list
> foundation-annou...@gnome.org
> h
Hi Max,
Thanks for your questions. Responses inline:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Max wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> First, thanks to all candidates for volunteering to the Foundation Board.
> Max come from GNOME.Asia team and thanks GNOME and board support Asia.
>
> I have 2 questions to all cand
Hi Karen,
Thanks for your questions. Responses inline:
Have you ever done any fundraising?
Yes, although not on such a scale as I would expect a GNOME director will
have to take on. More like a few small fundraisers for various charities
and perhaps more recently, some of you may remember that
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
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
Hi Andreas,
Thanks for your question!
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Tobias Mueller
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On So, 2015-05-24 at 19:23 +0200, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> > What, in your mind, is the best use of these funds now? Kept as a War
> > Chest [2] or spent on something specific?
> I don't have
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, R
Hi Liam,
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Liam R. E. Quin wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-05-24 at 21:52 +0100, Magdalen Berns wrote:
> > Hi Andreas,
> >
> > I think most of us haven't seen latest the accounts yet, but I think
> > it's
> > probably fair
Hi Fabiana,
Great question, thanks! Response inline:
> I'd like to hear your thoughts on implementing transparency and
> accountability on the Board.
>
> How transparent the work of the Board should be to Foundation members?
> What should be communicated and when?
>
I think it is appropriate the
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Josh Triplett
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
>
> 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
> excl
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:
>
>
Hi Sri,
Thanks for your questions!
It is my impression (and I state impression because I am providing no
> data) that GNOME has more reliance on people paid to work on GNOME
> than community. I do not question the passion and dedication to those
> who are paid on GNOME, I know that they would do
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your question.
I'd like to ask the candidates, how do you think GNOME should
> contribute more to the advance of free software and users' freedom in
> general (in addition to being useful free software).
>
Too many disabled people still don’t have the luxury of being able
Hi Richard,
How do you suggest the GNOME Foundation could contribute more to
> advance the cause of free software and users' freedom, over and above
> what GNOME contributes by being useful free software?
I am not sure whether you feel I answered your question either. I think it
could be useful
> I've seen this mentioned previously on this list as well, and I'm
>> curious how that happened.
>>
>
There is an interesting blog about these things which is worth a read
(seems a little like some rule tightening has gone on and perhaps caught a
few organisations unaware, but it's hard to say wh
Hi Josh,
And thanks for the confirmation about GNOME's status.
>
I doubt the information from California Department of justice is
inaccurate, but if that is the case it would be wise for us to address that
with them. What I suspect is more likely to have happened is what Karen has
suggested could
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your email.
The FSF has the same status; anything that's lawful for the FSF is
> lawful for the GNOME Foundation too.
Does this not limit the ability of the FSF to campaign against US laws
which attack software freedom somewhat? It seems very much like legislative
changes
Hi Richard
> There are a few subtle ways of getting the message out which we could
> > explore: For example, getting GNOME listed onto some popular websites
> in
> > the UK (e.g. BBC, NHS, RNIB etc) and elsewhere, by approaching them
> with up
> > to date instruction manuals on how to use
Hi Richard,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Magdalen Berns
wrote:
> Hi Richard
>
> > There are a few subtle ways of getting the message out which we could
>> > explore: For example, getting GNOME listed onto some popular websites
>> in
>> > the UK (e.
Hi Karen,
Thanks for your input.
> > Also, we are not allowed to work for or against specific candidates
>> > > for office.
>>
>> > I think you are correct about this. Am I right in assuming that only
>> > applies to political parties in the USA, then?
>>
>> I don't know -- for that you should ch
Hi Karen,
I think we signed up to the EU "fix my documents" initiative and I
>> would really hope we could continue to support work like that without
>> it being an issue. My guess would be that putting our name to that
>> sort of campaign should be okay, since advocating a legislative
>> amendmen
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the detailed response. Comments and questions inline:
> > Oh wait, I think I do actually see what you mean now You're
> concerned
> > about the message we send out if we use non-free software to promote
> GNOME
> > and things like this e.g. git servers and social
Great line up! Congratulations to the new set of directors. Also, well done
to everyone who kept the election interesting by getting involved. Cheers
to you and the committee for organising things as well. :D
Magdalen
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Fabiana Simões
wrote:
> Hello Foundation!
>
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Jeff Fortin Tam wrote:
> Le mardi 07 juillet 2015 à 09:46 +0200, Jens Georg a écrit :
>
>
> * https://kickstarter.com/projects/technoruninc/stratos/
>
>
>
> Apart from the massive annoying marketing speech in the kickstarter,
> what's the exact purpose of this poi
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Josh Triplett
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 09:04:52PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> >> * https://kickstarter.com/projects/technoruninc/stratos/
> >
> > What is the relationship between this and GNOME?
>
> None whatsoever, other than that their mock
> The license we've chosen clearly allows people to sell products with the
> code included, so I'm assuming this is strictly a trademark issues.
>
Jeff initially raised some concern about whether source code was being
included as they don't seem to indicate either way.
> As far as I can tell thi
98 matches
Mail list logo
