2009/5/8 Sebastian Trüg <[email protected]>: > I understand your concerns with Oscaf. As for the paying members: this is only > intended for industry players. KDE for example is a non-paying member.
How doe one become a non-paying member? I just checked out the application form and I was not sure if that was the right way... Of course the first question is really whether it makes sense if we form a real organization for Xesam and sign that one up. I have not given this a lot of thought yet, but any comments would be welcome. > Apart from that Oscaf is not very active yet and in the near future you can > expect us (the Xesam and Nepomuk-KDE community) to be the most active. Players > like Nokia will also mostly (if not entirely) contribute though open-source > channels (again: Xesam, probably Evgeny and Philip). The same is true for > Mandriva. > AFAICT we simply are the most important users of the ontologies to date. So it > makes sense to get in there and make the Xesam/Nepomuk-KDE voice heard. > > Still, this does not solve the technical aspects since Oscaf has no bug > tracking or code hosting system (apart from the sf project Leo created). And mailing lists? I could not find any public mailing lists on the oscaf.org site or the SF project page... > So the Oscaf question is not really worth discussing. We should be in there, > we are in there. The question is where do we (and this already means Xesam and > the rest of the Oscaf members) host the code and the bugs. Where do we > discuss. And like that I am back to a platform other than Xesam or Nepomuk. > But I will not follow that road again. :P > Thus, in conclusion: don't be afraid of Oscaf, we have the opportunity to > shape it, to make it act the way we need. Because the buzzwords on the oscaf > page AFAIK are all there is. Ok, so what we need to do now is just getting to it! :-) I really don't care how or where those lists are hosted, only that we get stuff done to make the FOSS desktop the coolest platform to do searching/semantic stuff on. Cheers, Mikkel > On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:09:18 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: >> 2009/5/7 Evgeny Egorochkin <[email protected]>: >> > On 7 мая 2009 13:41:18 Roberto Guido wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Sebastian Faubel >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 11:41 +0200, Sebastian Kügler wrote: >> >> >> The OSCAF >> >> >> foundation has been set up by NEPOMUK participants (KDE is among >> >> >> them) and its goals align with those of KDE. >> >> >> >> Oh, I missed this detail... >> >> In previous mails (by Trueg, probably...) "neutrality" was one >> >> argument. And OSCAF is not "neutral" at all, in a standardization >> >> scenario. Or I misunderstood "neutrality"? >> > >> > OSCAF was supposed to be a place to do maintenance of nepomuk. So it's >> > pretty neutral for any of participants and participant list is not closed >> > as such. Or you whould clarify what kind of neutrality you expect? >> >> What is a participant in OSCAF? As far as I can read on oscaf.org one >> has to pay money to be a member... Also the project and governance >> structure is heavily (like _heavily_) geared towards an industry setup >> and not for a grass-roots, fast moving, do-it-our-selves, kinda >> movement... Reading the pages it seems like an insurmountable task to >> tackle in spare-time-only at least. >> >> I must admit that reading the pages on oscaf.org (organization and >> membership pages) leaves me a bit intimidated. And also leaves me >> questionable whether simply spinning off a vigilante sourceforge >> project will help collaboration... But I really am still puzzled about >> this whole oscaf deal. It seems that some people on the lists are into >> the inner workings behind this, perhaps they can enlighten everybody? >> >> >> or opening Nepomuk to standardization (so: why depend on OSCAF?) ? >> > >> > Sorry I don't understand what you mean here. Standardization at what >> > level/ for what purpose/by whom etc? >> >> I think the deal is that Roberto (very understandably) is not well >> informed about OSCAF (neither am I). As far as I can see there really >> is no question here... If we want to continue with Nepomuk we must >> collaborate with OSCAF - and I think this is what the industry players >> here want (notably Nokia and Mandriva, but this is pure guesswork). >> >> > If Xesam doesn't want to become a fork of Nepomuk, we have to have some >> > dialogue with OSCAF. If OSCAF doesn't want Xesam to be come a fork of >> > Nepomuk, they have to somehow listen to Xesam. It's pretty simple -- >> > dialogue is the key. >> >> As I read this paragraph it means that it is paramount that we stay >> under the Xesam umbrella to have a common, more powerful, voice in the >> OSCAF community. >> >> I urge anyone to go read the pages on the whole OSCAF setup on >> oscaf.org before they voice their opinions here (be warned though if >> you are buzzword allergic you should do some antihistamines before >> going there :-D). > > _______________________________________________ > Xesam mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam > -- Cheers, Mikkel _______________________________________________ Xesam mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam
