relicensing to GPLv3-family of licenses (was Re: Distribution Naming System)
Sébastien Wilmet wrote at 15:35 (EDT) on Sunday: We can also upgrade our software licences to the GPLv3 and LGPLv3. While this is a separate issue from the main thread, I must admit that I personally would very much like to see this happen. I gave a talk at GUADEC four or five years ago now explaining how this could be done in an easy way, step by step. If anyone wants to work on this, I would be delighted to help. Emmanuele Bassi wrote at 05:11 (EDT) on Monday: on top of that, the v2 has given us the widest adoption possible, and Copyleft is always a trade-off between more software freedom for users and wider adoption. I don't actually think GPLv2 gave you the widest adoption possible -- a non-copyleft license like the X11 license probably would have done that, but at the cost of users' software freedom. RMS wrote at 12:58 (EDT) on Monday: For many libraries, using LGPLv2.1 may be best, to allow use in GPLv2-covered programs. I have to disagree with RMS on this point. As I proposed on desktop-devel a long time ago: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2010-July/msg00097.html IMO, the best license for currently LGPLv2.1-or-later libraries is to upgrade to (GPLv2-only|LGPLv3-or-later). As I suggested in my aforementioned GUADEC talk, this is an easy first step toward moving fully to the GPLv3 family of licenses. Emmanuele Bassi wrote at 05:11 (EDT) on Monday: even if we don't take the or later at face value, re-licensing our platform is going to be impossible: we don't have copyright assignment (for a lot of good reasons) and in some cases some contributors do not exist any more, making the re-licensing effort a non-starter. As others have noted, this doesn't really make sense. or-later is designed to make such GPL-family-version relicensing possible without copyright assignment nor CLAs. -- -- bkuhn ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Changes on the GNOME Foundation Membership Committee
Hi, I am a member of the Docs team, and interned with the Foundation in OPW July - September'13. I would like to apply to become a part of the Membership Committee as well, because I think it's time I start getting more familiar with the organisational workings of GNOME. Best, Aruna ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Current state of Foundation finances
Dear Foundation members, Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which we hold for other organisations. By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the next three months have already been informed of the issue and most have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending reimbursements over other expenses. The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the associated income has been slow to come in. The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to know more details about the problem, please read https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? I'll leave the question of what these other activities might be to the engagement core team, who discuss that at length and will certainly have better ideas than I do. The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other activities as they already sponsor OPW? On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova kittykat3...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Foundation members, Due to a shortfall in the budget, the Foundation board voted on 2014-04-08 to freeze all expenditure which is not essential to the running of the Foundation. This freeze affects sponsorship expenses which are unpaid at this time, but it does not affect the funds which we hold for other organisations. By keeping our expenditures to a minimum while we regain some delayed revenue, we aim to have things back to normal within a few months. All Foundation members who expect to receive reimbursements within the next three months have already been informed of the issue and most have responded positively. The board will prioritise these pending reimbursements over other expenses. The issue has been caused by a number of factors. These include increased administrative overheads in the last few years due to the increased turnover which has been caused by to the Outreach Program for Women (OPW), and the associated payments going out while the associated income has been slow to come in. The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to know more details about the problem, please read https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. ___ 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: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 01:45 +0200, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote: I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? No, for two reasons: 1. My understanding after reading the FAQ is that GNOME Foundation handles the payment for every intern in OPW (not only gnomers), but we are not getting the funds from the sponsors and other organizations timely. So, these are not transferible funds to other activities. 2. I think embracing diversity is one of GNOME strengths as a project, not only in gender equality, but also in other areas, like accessibility and non-English speakers. Diversity enriches a community by bringing multiple mindsets that in the long term pays off in the software produced. Dropping OPW not only would stop bringing new blood to the project, but it could be also a discouraging factor to the current developers. The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other activities as they already sponsor OPW? They are sponsoring OPW, so they are interested in that. The problem is the GNOME Foundation has not following up with them to cash the promised funds on a timely manner. -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ 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: Current state of Foundation finances
Thanks for the answer. I think the question deserves being asked, I'd be interested in other opinions, as well as hopefully facts about sponsors' involvement (of particular interest would be the question to know if they see sponsoring OPW as just a way to help GNOME at large or if they do have a particular interest in outreach to women). Cheers On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote: On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 01:45 +0200, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote: I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? No, for two reasons: 1. My understanding after reading the FAQ is that GNOME Foundation handles the payment for every intern in OPW (not only gnomers), but we are not getting the funds from the sponsors and other organizations timely. So, these are not transferible funds to other activities. 2. I think embracing diversity is one of GNOME strengths as a project, not only in gender equality, but also in other areas, like accessibility and non-English speakers. Diversity enriches a community by bringing multiple mindsets that in the long term pays off in the software produced. Dropping OPW not only would stop bringing new blood to the project, but it could be also a discouraging factor to the current developers. The question I'm asking here is really: would these sponsors be ready to help on other fronts, and isn't there a situation where certain sponsors already help for OPW, and can't consider funding GNOME for other activities as they already sponsor OPW? They are sponsoring OPW, so they are interested in that. The problem is the GNOME Foundation has not following up with them to cash the promised funds on a timely manner. -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote: I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund our other activities as well as OPW. Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging those members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to start. Meg ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
I'm not sure this is a direct answer to the question I was asking, but yes it is clear that finding more funding would be beneficial in the absolute, I have absolutely no clue regarding that though :) On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:44 AM, meg ford meg...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.orgwrote: I'll play devil's advocate here: Couldn't GNOME use funds from these various sponsors to fund activities more directly beneficial to its future than OPW? I think a better approach might be: how can we motivate sponsors to fund our other activities as well as OPW. Perhaps finding members who are as passionate and motivated about other aspects of our project as the organizers of OPW are, and encouraging those members to seek funding for initiatives, would be a reasonable place to start. Meg ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Current state of Foundation finances
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Ekaterina Gerasimova kittykat3...@gmail.com wrote: The board expects that you may have some questions or would like to know more details about the problem, please read https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/CurrentBudgetFAQ and contact the board at board-l...@gnome.org if you have any further questions. I want to ask questions. Was this situation visible or known before or at the time funds for Dev X Hackfest were being allocated? If so, why wasn't a cautionary note not issued when funds less than requested were approved for some attendees and that GNOME was looking at a tight situation on funds? I have always found this a major hassle that there is no queue/request system in place to check the status of a reimbursement and that one has to depend on e-mail threads to ask if a reimbursement was sent or if it's being delayed. I was delayed by 2 months on my first reimbursement and now again due to this situation. Could this be resolved by putting in place web application that one can login to with their e-mail address and the details would of reimbursement associated with that person could be pooled in there? This web application should also be able to send emails every time there is an update for the person. Perhaps even streamlining and eliminating mistakes that can happen with a normal *.odt form, we can have the web app take in details. Thanks. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
