On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 11:47:59AM -0400, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
so the list would be a safe forum for companies with strict
policies against sharing information, to seek help from other
companies (with all privy parties being companies of some minimum
size, and employing some
Le Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 09:07:22AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Regarding the secrecy requirement, I can totally see how sketching a
business model involving several business entities on one of the two
examples above could require some secrecy. I prefer to see it happening
on a
On 05/09/13 at 10:48 +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
I suggest one reason may be a lack of interest by the project and that
consultants have moved to discussing debian in other places than the
project lists, such as social media.
There could probably be uses for -consultants if project leaders showed
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 09:07:22AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
But there are other ways for business entities to help Debian. I can
think of at least two:
Just off the top of my head, two more:
- OEM work to have Debian pre-installed on machines available on the
market
- certification
how do you envision a company with such restrictive policies giving
back to the developer and user community?
It amazes me how much time we spend discussing he secret nature of the list
although it was more than once said that this is not necessarily meant to stay
that way.
To answer your
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
regarding such special needs, i can think of a few projects that
could use hosting that provides a degree of confidentiality not
provided by the google-way. do you suppose that google could make
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
how do you envision a company with such restrictive policies giving
back to the developer and user community?
It amazes me how much time we spend discussing he secret nature of
the list although it was more than once said that this is not
necessarily
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:39:00PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
On 03/09/13 19:14, Michael Meskes wrote:
Right and we already have a debian-consultants mailing list, don't we?
Yes, and that list is also struggling, so why fork it?
Because the list may be struggling because its definition is too
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:48:59PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Most importantly, what is the aim of picking a random size limit?
The size limit is not exactly random, but it may be too high or too low.
And where else defines company as one DD and at least 10 people on
staff? I think being a
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 03:31:05PM -0400, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
tldnr: what sorts of transactions are supposed to take place on the
closed debian-companies list? how will their secret-from-users nature
empower users? how will their secret-from-project-members empower the
debian
On 05/09/13 10:22, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:48:59PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Most importantly, what is the aim of picking a random size limit?
The size limit is not exactly random, but it may be too high or too low.
Great, but what is the aim of that limit? To encourage
Hi!
* Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org [130902 16:23]:
as you may or may not know there has been talk about starting a communiy of
companies around Debian. I'd like to get things moving now and I believe the
DPL agrees.
I think it is a wonderfull idea and whish you good luck forming that
Quoting Michael Meskes (2013-09-05 11:45:49)
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 03:31:05PM -0400, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu
wrote:
tldnr: what sorts of transactions are supposed to take place on the
closed debian-companies list? how will their secret-from-users
nature empower users? how will
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 11:14:11AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:39:00PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
On 03/09/13 19:14, Michael Meskes wrote:
Right and we already have a debian-consultants mailing list, don't we?
Yes, and that list is also struggling, so why fork it?
hi michael.
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 03:31:05PM -0400, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
tldnr: what sorts of transactions are supposed to take place on the
closed debian-companies list? how will their secret-from-users
nature empower users? how
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 03:31:05PM -0400, david...@ling.ohio-state.edu
wrote:
Who?
A companies community should only contain companies.
what kind of community contains only companies? such a
I'm not sure if this is a perfect fit though. We do have many DDs that
freelance (including work with and on Debian) and they would not
qualify. Other companies might have several DDs but only 10 persons of
I'm not bound to the number of 10, 5 may be enough.
staff. What if the DD is only
Hi,
On 04.09.2013 15:38, Michael Meskes wrote:
There is no definitive answer for this. Let's try collecting a group first,
before getting into those details.
You do not found a peer group by inventing random rules meant to exclude
people. Even less so in a Debian eco-system which is built on
You do not found a peer group by inventing random rules meant to exclude
Please get the facts straight. A group of companies can only be build by
companies, not by random people. And somehow the entity company has to be
defined.
people. Even less so in a Debian eco-system which is built on the
On 03/09/13 19:14, Michael Meskes wrote:
Right and we already have a debian-consultants mailing list, don't we?
Yes, and that list is also struggling, so why fork it?
Regards,
--
MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op
http://koha-community.org supporter, web
hi michael.
tldnr: what sorts of transactions are supposed to take place on the
closed debian-companies list? how will their secret-from-users nature
empower users? how will their secret-from-project-members empower the
debian project?
On Mon, 2 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
Hi,
as you
On 04/09/13 16:14, Michael Meskes wrote:
You do not found a peer group by inventing random rules meant to exclude
Please get the facts straight. A group of companies can only be build by
companies, not by random people. And somehow the entity company has to be
defined.
Most importantly, what
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Meskes wrote:
It is not just the description but the subscription policy that is changed.
But
my goal is to get some feedback about the idea in general as it hasn't got
much
traction so far. If there is no interest from companies we can simply close
Von: Michael Meskes mes...@debian.org
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:12:12AM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
I didn't really understand your proposal, it was missing the What?
section. What do you intend to change apart from the description of
the debian-companies list?
It is not just the
Am 03.09.2013 12:04, schrieb Steffen Möller:
It is not just the description but the subscription policy that is
changed. But
my goal is to get some feedback about the idea in general as it
hasn't got much
traction so far. If there is no interest from companies we can
simply close the
list.
Gesendet: Dienstag, 03. September 2013 um 14:24 Uhr
Am 03.09.2013 12:04, schrieb Steffen Möller:
It is not just the description but the subscription policy that is
changed. But
my goal is to get some feedback about the idea in general as it
hasn't got much
traction so far. If
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:12:12AM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
I didn't really understand your proposal, it was missing the What?
section. What do you intend to change apart from the description of
the debian-companies list?
It is not just the
Hi,
On Dienstag, 3. September 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
But I don't understand why
interested DD aren't allowed to subscribe to it. I also don't understand
what the minimum size requirement brings.
me neither. why are small debian companies no debian companies (in this
context)? Why
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:14:10PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Dienstag, 3. September 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
But I don't understand why
interested DD aren't allowed to subscribe to it. I also don't understand
what the minimum size requirement brings.
me neither. why are
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 12:18:05PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
The graphs on lists.debian.org seem to indicate that the list has not
seen much use:
Indeed it hasn't. IMO due to the lack of an active group coordinator,
whom we now seem to have.
Regarding the privateness of the list, sure, the
On Dienstag, 3. September 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
But I don't understand why
interested DD aren't allowed to subscribe to it. I also don't understand
what the minimum size requirement brings.
me neither. why are small debian companies no debian companies (in this
context)?
Hi,
as you may or may not know there has been talk about starting a communiy of
companies around Debian. I'd like to get things moving now and I believe the
DPL agrees.
Let me start by answering a few questions:
Why?
Companies (may) have different needs and different ideas about what they want
32 matches
Mail list logo
