Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:35:46AM -0700, Stormy Peters wrote: > When bad behaviour happens we talk about it a lot but nothing happens. As > Dave says, people (good contributors in many cases) just leave. I know of this first hand in Dave's own case, where he left the GIMP project due to issues with a contributor. I was also badly harassed during that time by this person. My point is that the current way of handling things is sufficient, and making foundation members sign a document is not going to change anything. > > How does requiring GNOME foundation members to sign this document help? > > Making it explicit the behaviour we want. Hopefully this would cause greater > self policing and peer control and eliminate the unwanted behaviour. This is where the guidelines are good enough. There is no need to sign documents. Such issues can be taken care of on a case-by-case basis locally (to the project) by the project developers, with caution and restraint. Also this policing is fine in theory, but I doubt you'd be able to remove a core contributor who sometimes behaves bluntly towards users. There are such GNOME committers (who cannot be removed, for the project will wither, or they are senior peers who the the developers will not agree to remove), who are otherwise fine and decent people. So if you are implementing this policing at top-level where the foundation decides, it can either be (1) without prejudice, or (2) skewed. I feel it's better to let the projects handle it censorship, ejection, etc. locally without policy documents. Dave, you left the GIMP project because of issues with a contributor. Do you really think that person would have been deterred from behaving so, if he/she had signed such a document? Mukund ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership
Hi Stormy On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 09:36:41AM -0700, Stormy Peters wrote: > We are talking about GNOME hosted platforms. Planet GNOME, > blogs.gnome.organd the GNOME mailing lists are all forums we host and > I think we can (and > do) expect a certain standard of conduct on them. For example, if someone > started spamming the Foundation list, we would block them. Would you agree that things such as filtering for spam (on lists, IRC, etc.), and removal of badly behaving people already happen, and these are not specific to GNOME foundation members? It should be commonsense to anyone that bad signal/noise will be punished, when other peers don't like it. How does requiring GNOME foundation members to sign this document help? > (Public does not mean you can do whatever you want. In most public places > there are laws you have to follow.) Nod, but this is a bad analogy. In public places, one must behave according to the law, but (having not understood that this applies to only GNOME infrastructure) I didn't want GNOME to make these rules. Mukund ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership
Hi Lucas On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:48:45PM +, Lucas Rocha wrote: > The GNOME Code of Conduct[1] has been serving very well as an > informal guideline for the community but we'd like to make it an > official document that new Foundation members are expected to > explicitly agree[2] with before being accepted. I think this is taking it too far. The "Code of Conduct" being presented as a set of guidelines is OK, but it is not wise to make it policy. The GNOME project is not a sect, to control what I can and cannot say/do in public. The current code of document[1] has some incredible guidelines such as the advice against using "RTFM", which arguably has nothing to do with bad behavior. Also, instructions such as "Be patient and generous" are vague by themselves. Your measure of patience may be quite different from mine. These are OK as guidelines, but not as policy. 1. http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Mukund ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Does GIMP support art tablets like the Wacom?
Hi G&B On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 03:08:23PM +0100, G&B AUTOMAZIONI wrote: > > I have problem to use GIMP 2.6.4 (Windows version installed > gimp-2.6.4-i686-setup.exe) with WACOM INTUOS 2 A3 (with driver > pro610-6_int.exe) the cursor do not coincide with the position of the > brush drawing line. > > With all the other program installed Wacom is OK. How I can resolve > the problem? This mailing list is not the correct place to ask for help with GIMP. Please use the following mailing list to ask GIMP user support questions.. other GIMP users and developers are on it: https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user Mukund ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Software relicensing, how is it done ?
Hi Tristan On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 05:06:07PM -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Richard M. Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > [...] > > As free software developers we naturally feel good to see our own > > programs in wider use. But what is really important is for free > > software to replace proprietary software. We can achieve more for > > freedom if we focus on the deeper and more important long-term goal. > > > Hi, > I dont see how I can agree that entering in direct competition > with anyone who wants to make a dollar from a software solution is > going to bring us to that long-term goal. Free software doesn't mean it cannot be put to commercial use, or profited from. Developing free software commercially and making money from it seems to actually work very well. * Companies which create free software profit from it. * There is money to hire developers who work on the project, so the rate of development is faster. * As free software evolves from many using it / modifying it / leaving feedback thanks to its freedoms, the quality of free software also increases. > Frankly, the company I formerly worked for, chose gtk+ for its C > object orented model, and it was possible because of the LGPL > licence. I would never had been paid to originally work on Glade for > the few months that Glade was my job assignment, I maybe would never > have heard of Glade, since then I can count the number of > substantialy large contributions on one hand, and half of those are > from vendors, or contractors working for vendors. > > Writing software is hard work, people rightfully want to get paid for > it, I hope that free software is the best software, and continue to believe > that we need to do it together, leverage people who are paid for their > work to make free software better, so that all projects can benefit, the > important part is to not get effected when commercial softwares have an > edge, and continue to slowly write better, free software. It's apparent from your description that this company (your former employer) created proprietary software. It's nice that they could hire you for improving Glade, this in itself does not mean only proprietary software companies can hire developers to work on free software which they would use in their proprietary software. A lot of free software development work takes place at companies such as Red Hat. It is freedom which makes derivative projects such as CentOS possible. While MySQL and Sleepy Cat (Oracle) are not appropriate examples in this context (as they own copyright and can offer their software under different licenses to proprietary users), you have other examples of free software vendors who make a profit: Mozilla, Wordpress. It's a business issue on how to make money with free software. IMHO, an IDE may be a bad idea of a commercial free software project. But on the other hand, the developers who use such IDEs can themselves extend it when they scratch an itch. Service oriented companies seem to do well with free software, so businesses need to think about adapting. In other words, free software does not limit you from making money, and you can get paid for writing free software. [1] > > I dont feel offended that someone else may write a frontend that > uses libgladeui and makes money on 6 years or so of my own work, > I offer it freely, and don't feel comfortable myself to be denied the > same freedom I would offer a user of the libgladeui library. > You should feel offended according to your earlier argument, if you feel that writing free software is hard work and developers should be paid for it. I completely support you here. Get paid for your time. [1] The GNOME Foundation bounties are a good example of this. I've had someone remember many months after writing code, to send me a cheque for a bounty. With free software, money chases you. :) Mukund ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
