Re: Software Freedom Conservancy
On 3/31/06, Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Anyone else have any objections or other thoughts on it?My $.02 is that it's necessary. Last year I had a chance for someone local to make a donation but they needed to do it to a registered 501c3 organization. Well, the money ended up going to a local charity instead. The last thing Jeremy needs is to have money passing through CW and I think we should get our finances straight. This really sounds like a win-win situation and I can't think of a single drawback. The real important thing is the taxes get done correctly so we don't lose the 501c3 exemption. Assuming it gets set up, I'll volunteer to go out and scrounge for some cash. Having some $$$ on hand wouldn't be a bad problem to have.-Brian
Re: Software Freedom Conservancy
Hi, On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:29:50PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote: > On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 21:48 -0600, Jeremy White wrote: > > Anyone else have any objections or other thoughts on it? > > Let's remember that it's not just firms like Google that could give "the > Wine project" money. Wine has some serious potential value for a whole > lot of people - scientists, governments, businesses, charities, etc. > What this means is that we're eligible for a whole ton of grants that > nobody has ever even bothered to apply for. Uh... not to disturb this discussion or anything, but isn't this here: http://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/2006033001926NWBZDV as planned by OSDL just about EXACTLY what would be needed? IMHO administrative stuff such as project financing would best be done by one central party for many projects, due to the many legal and administrative issues involved (JFYI: the *very only* reason for the recent Lobby4Linux Austin project failure was - you guessed it - management of donation finances and nobody willing to carry that risk and responsibility!! A shame, really...). These things should *really* be centralized I think, so please push into that direction and get OSDL to widen its scope if needed and possible. This is long overdue IMHO. Andreas
Re: Software Freedom Conservancy
Hi, On 4/1/06, Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A while back I began seriously thinking about the possibility of > nonprofit status and began researching into all sorts of grants and > fundraising sources that Wine could potentially tap. Needless to say, > now I have reason to dig up my notes and look into it further. I did quite a lot of work with this for the ReactOS project and actually did all the paperwork required so I am happy to help in any way. ReactOS does not get nearly as much support as Wine does and so it mostly amounted to a waste of time and money for me. I have decided to disband the ReactOS Foundation due to this and a number of other reasons but I think the time has come for a Wine Foundation. If Wine is every going to get the support it needs beyond CodeWeavers I think there needs to be the organization there to handle large cash donations in the event IBM (Gasp) or anyone else ever decides to join the party. -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
Re: Software Freedom Conservancy
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 21:48 -0600, Jeremy White wrote: > Anyone else have any objections or other thoughts on it? Let's remember that it's not just firms like Google that could give "the Wine project" money. Wine has some serious potential value for a whole lot of people - scientists, governments, businesses, charities, etc. What this means is that we're eligible for a whole ton of grants that nobody has ever even bothered to apply for. With the officialness of a respected nonprofit to act as a neutral body, we can start applying for these things. Significantly, interested donors can also get tax deductions and all the other side benefits that such charities bring. A while back I began seriously thinking about the possibility of nonprofit status and began researching into all sorts of grants and fundraising sources that Wine could potentially tap. Needless to say, now I have reason to dig up my notes and look into it further. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Re: Software Freedom Conservancy
Jeremy White wrote: No objection from me.. Although, I should mention that I haven't seen much in the way of a link to donate to the project. Theres no link on the main page anywhere that I can see. Perhaps the fund would be a little bigger if it was easier to find a donate link? Hmm. On the lower right hand side of the main page is a donate link, and there is also a donations request on Sourceforge. But you raise a good point; feel free to make a suggestion for how it should change (a patch?) - I'm certainly not opposed. (Although the honest truth is that we raise more money than we need right now, at least for Wine. For CodeWeavers, we can always use more money :-/) Cheers, Jeremy hmm.. I didn't see that at all lol. I did however notice the contributing link shortly after I sent the last email. I think if we put the donate link (as well as the codeweavers link) on the left just under the search link they might get noticed a little more.. Of course you do raise a good point about raising more money than wine really needs, so on to the next idea... The short answer is that I dont have an idea right now, but I have done some thinking about it.. If you want the long answer, keep reading, else, just click close lol... Obviously codeweavers requires advertising and marketing in order to get new customers. The majority of that advertising so far has been done by the community and word of mouth. The biggest step towards taking codeweavers mainstream is obviously to get more people to switch to linux.. the press has done a decent job of helping us out in that respect, but a lot of people dont read the magazines. I mean I see it all the time on various forums, my favorite being the forum entitled the worst tech support call you have ever made... Someone will get DSL service, and not have a router, and think that it will work out of the box with whatever os they use... So when it doesnt and they cant figure it out, they call dsl tech support, and ask "Do you support Linux?"... Guess what the tech support rep asks 99% of the time... "What is Linux? Is that a new version of Windows?". Back to the point though, people dont read magazines or stuff on the internet so they dont know theres an alternative to windows. That means they dont know about cW or crossover. How do we get more users over to Linux? Good question, unfortunately one I don't have an answer for right now. Once we get users to Linux, or maybe even as the hook to get them to switch would be to show them crossover while showing them linux and how not prone to viruses it is, show them internet explorer running under it, or better yet show them stuff like word, excel, and adobe, and then show them firefox and say ok ie is the only app we are going to take away from you.. then the security issues are small (no ie to infect) but they can still use their regular stuff, and their machine will seem more responsive compared to how it ran on windows. I'm sure those are all ideas your people have already had and discussed, but shoot, it would be nice to see some linux based booths at e3 or ces or the revamped comdex once it comes out.. of course the best way to get mainstream is the force your way mainstream, more and better placement on store shelves.. get the stores to start pitching linux and the benefits of using it over windows. then have the rep help them decide on a distro and put them in touch with someone familiar with linux. of course that is all beyond codeweavers and wine's scope, but that is the idea.. get other linux companies to start pushing it more. M$ wants to play hardball? We gotta start predicting their pitches. Tom
