On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:48 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
Hola Arturo,
At 07:34 19-08-2013, Arturo Servin wrote:
Academic might work. Open source not so much as other
mentioned. Does
Big Corporation doing Open Source apply?
I was tempted to propose non-profit, but
--On Sunday, August 18, 2013 17:04 -0700 SM s...@resistor.net
wrote:
I'd love to get more developers in general to participate -
whether they're open or closed source doesn't matter. But I
don't know how to do that, beyond what we do now. The email
lists are free and open. The
On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:04 PM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
On reading the second paragraph of the above message I see that you and I
might have a common objective. You mentioned that you don't know how to do
that beyond what is done now. I suggested a rate for people with an open
source
On Monday, August 19, 2013 09:35:25 Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:04 PM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
On reading the second paragraph of the above message I see that you and I
might have a common objective. You mentioned that you don't know how to
do that beyond what is done
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Scott Kitterman sc...@kitterman.comwrote:
But my point was more that open source is meaningless, and not what I
think we're missing/need. I agree we need more developers (at least in
RAI
it would help), but whether the things they develop are open source
weight, or any such thing.
That sounds like the ability to pay. It might be worth considering
changing the student rate to an academic and open source rate and
doubling the rate. I am not getting into a definition of academic or
open source [1]. It is left to the organization to determine
Hola Arturo,
At 07:34 19-08-2013, Arturo Servin wrote:
Academic might work. Open source not so much as other
mentioned. Does
Big Corporation doing Open Source apply?
I was tempted to propose non-profit, but also there are
organizations
with large budgets. And profit driven
Hi John,
At 06:11 19-08-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
I think this is bogus and takes us down an undesirable path.
Ok.
First, I note that, in some organizations (including some large
ones), someone might be working on an open source project one
month and a proprietary one the next, or maybe
--On Monday, August 19, 2013 12:49 -0700 SM s...@resistor.net
wrote:
...
First, I note that, in some organizations (including some
large ones), someone might be working on an open source
project one month and a proprietary one the next, or maybe
both
concurrently. Would it be appropriate
On Monday, August 19, 2013 18:08:00 John C Klensin wrote:
--On Monday, August 19, 2013 12:49 -0700 SM s...@resistor.net
wrote:
...
First, I note that, in some organizations (including some
large ones), someone might be working on an open source
project one month and a proprietary one
weight, or any such thing.
That sounds like the ability to pay. It might be worth considering
changing the student rate to an academic and open source rate and
doubling the rate. I am not getting into a definition of academic
or open source [1]. It is left to the organization to determine
of the system. I'm not proposing they get
more attention, or more weight, or any such thing.
That sounds like the ability to pay. It might be worth considering
changing the student rate to an academic and open source rate and doubling
the rate. I am not getting into a definition of academic
On Aug 18, 2013, at 5:21 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
1. If the IETF is serious about running code (see RFC 6982) it would try to
encourage open source developers to participate more effectively in the IETF.
Define open source developers. Technically quite a lot of developers at my
--On Sunday, 18 August, 2013 08:33 -0400 Hadriel Kaplan
hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote:
...
And it does cost the IETF lots of money to host the physical
meetings, and that cost is directly proportional to the number
of physical attendees. More attendees = more cost.
I had promised myself
I've been told, though obviously I don't know, that the costs are proportional.
I assume it's not literally a if we get one additional person, it costs an
additional $500. But I assume SM wasn't proposing to get just one or a few
more open source developer attendees. If we're talking about
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Hadriel Kaplan
hadriel.kap...@oracle.comwrote:
On Aug 18, 2013, at 5:21 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
1. If the IETF is serious about running code (see RFC 6982) it would try
to encourage open source developers to participate more effectively in the
IETF.
In article 01672754-1c4f-465b-b737-7e82dc5b3...@oracle.com you write:
I've been told, though obviously I don't know, that the costs are
proportional. I assume it's not literally a if we get
one additional person, it costs an additional $500. But I assume SM wasn't
proposing to get just one or
Hi Hadriel,
At 05:33 18-08-2013, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
Define open source developers. Technically quite a lot of
developers at my employer develop open source, as do many at many
of the corporations which send people to the IETF. Heck, even I
personally submit code to Wireshark now and then.
18 matches
Mail list logo
