On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 17:34 -0500, Richard M. Stallman wrote:
> Nearly - though any new acronym can obfuscate. For that reason, I'd
> suggest going with "ISD", because of its similarity to the familiar
> "ISV", at least the reader may clue in by association and context.
>
> ISD wo
Vincent Untz wrote:
[I removed all the cc]
On dim, 2005-11-27 at 13:48 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:48 +, Bill Haneman wrote:
Nearly - though any new acronym can obfuscate. For that reason, I'd
suggest going with "ISD", because of its similarity to the fa
[I removed all the cc]
On dim, 2005-11-27 at 13:48 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:48 +, Bill Haneman wrote:
> > Nearly - though any new acronym can obfuscate. For that reason, I'd
> > suggest going with "ISD", because of its similarity to the familiar
> > "ISV", at
En/na Davyd Madeley ha escrit:
> That point is that we need to encourage traditional independant
> software VENDORS to our platform.
Agreed. But this doesn't invalidate the Independent Software Developers
(ISD) proposal.
Please note that by recommending Independent Software Developers we are
n
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 11:23:44PM -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> Not necessarily. There's no reason why a vendor developing tax
> software cannot release their software as Free Software. They
> still can sell their software, the same way Red Hat can sell its
> software. And they have the bene
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, Davyd Madeley wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 06:48:31PM -0700, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
>
> > > Businesses require more than an email client and a web browser, they
> > > require the highly vertical applications that enable them to carry
> > > out their business. These may
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 06:48:31PM -0700, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
> > Businesses require more than an email client and a web browser, they
> > require the highly vertical applications that enable them to carry
> > out their business. These may be as simple as inventory control or
> > as complex
On Mon, 2005-28-11 at 09:42 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 06:26:05PM +0100, Quim Gil wrote:
>
> > In GNOME we donpt talk usually about first-party and second-party
> > developers AFAIK (I have only heard of beer-parties). But we talsk about
> > GNOME developers and GNOME ha
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 06:26:05PM +0100, Quim Gil wrote:
> In GNOME we donpt talk usually about first-party and second-party
> developers AFAIK (I have only heard of beer-parties). But we talsk about
> GNOME developers and GNOME hackers, in this context I find more
> appropriate Independent Softw
Nearly - though any new acronym can obfuscate. For that reason, I'd
suggest going with "ISD", because of its similarity to the familiar
"ISV", at least the reader may clue in by association and context.
ISD would solve the problem equally well.
Erm, what's wrong with "develop
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 14:55 +, Alan Horkan wrote:
> > >We can't solve the problem by denying it.
>
> No one is denying the power of words but matters of linguistics are
> distracting from more important issues (like the need for clear
> information and heading off patent threats).
Actually, t
I agree it's worth the effort of taking out 'vendor' of our vocabulary.
Between Independent Software Developer or Third-party Developer I would
go for the first option, because it is more self-explanatory. You
understand what a third-party developer is if you first understand what
first-party and
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, Bill Haneman wrote:
> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 10:48:09 +
> From: Bill Haneman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> foundation-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Off Topic] W
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:48 +, Bill Haneman wrote:
> Nearly - though any new acronym can obfuscate. For that reason, I'd
> suggest going with "ISD", because of its similarity to the familiar
> "ISV", at least the reader may clue in by association and context.
> [Sort of like URL vs URI...]
> And as an individual, I think that choice of word did fail.
> Whenever I saw/read ISV in any context in GNOME, I thought of it
> as issues concerning businesses only, not myself as a *user* of
> the GNOME libraries, etc. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
No indeed you were not. Count me in :)
>
Richard M. Stallman wrote:
Maybe we should just claim that we can't spell very well; ISV = "Third
Party Developer". A whole new kind of a10n[1]. ;-)
We can't solve the problem by denying it.
We use the term interchangably with 'third party developers', and have made
that explicit
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Alan Horkan wrote:
> > Does "ISV" stand for "Independent Software Vendor"? If so, the term is
> > often misleading, because the most important developers of GNOME
> > applications--those developing free software--are mostly not vendors.
>
> The important point is the need for
[crossposting removed]
Subject changed to reflect the off topic nature of this discussion,
and to summarize the point being made in the previous message.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Richard M. Stallman wrote:
> Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 11:22:22 -0500
> From: Richard M. Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
18 matches
Mail list logo
