Hi Richard,
(we are not candidates and shouldn't derail this thread but just a
quick response)
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I really think the GNOME OS idea is a very good one, that is, making
> GNOME provide access to configuration and features of the underly
Andy:
On 05/26/11 04:51, Andy Wingo wrote:
You just used the name "Richard Stallman" as a token for "this argument
is invalid."
You then proceeded to call someone stalinist; was it Richard? Was it
GNOME OS proponents? Unclear.
This was a poor attempt at humor, I guess. With my words I was
Hi Brian,
On Wed 25 May 2011 18:30, Brian Cameron writes:
> Using the GNOME brand to foster divisions within the Free Software or
> GNU/Linux community, to me, feels like the sort of thing Richard
> Stallman would be into. While I love free software, I personally do
> not drink this sort of Sta
On 05/25/2011 02:24 PM, Frederic Peters wrote:
Hello all,
GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
to distributions (based or not on the Lin
I really think the GNOME OS idea is a very good one, that is, making
GNOME provide access to configuration and features of the underlying OS,
so that it is a complete desktop that can deal with everything the users
would ever need from a desktop.
The idea is fine, but calling it "G
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (based or not on th
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (ba
Hello Frederic :)
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to
hi Frederic,
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (bas
2011/5/25 Frederic Peters :
> What are your thougths on this?[2] Do you think this is a foundation
> job to answer those questions? If not, is this a responsibility of the
> release team? Or something that is best left unanswered, as pieces are
> put into positions by different persons?
The idea
On 2011-05-25 at 08:24, Frederic Peters wrote:
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (based or not on the Linux ker
Fred:
GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
to distributions (based or not on the Linux kernel).
I remember sitting in Jon McCann's ta
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (ba
Le mercredi 25 mai 2011 à 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters a écrit :
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributi
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (ba
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 08:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
> discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
> and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
> to distributions (ba
Hello all,
GNOME OS has been mentioned and questioned repeatedly in recent
discussions on desktop-devel-list, about its definition itself[1],
and the changing (or not?) role of the GNOME project with regards
to distributions (based or not on the Linux kernel).
What are your thougths on this?[2] D
17 matches
Mail list logo
