[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation
From: |
MJ Ray |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation |
Date: |
Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:42:46 +0100 |
On 2004-10-01 14:34:43 +0100 Gregory John Casamento
<address@hidden> wrote:
[...] You had suggested the FSF run it [...]
No, I never suggested that the FSF should run a GNUstep Foundation/
Association/ whatever. I suggested that the FSF might be a good
foundation to collect and distribute GNUstep donations. I find it
incredible that you can misunderstand my post like that.
[...] You are the one arguing for the FSF to run the collection and
distribution of funds for GNUstep, albeit at Adam's "say so"... [...]
s/run/handle/;# Please try not to change my meaning.
It seems to me
that it's better that we are in complete control if the funds
submitted for
the
use of GNUstep. Also, by making it part of the FSF it makes it at
the FSF's
sole discretion how the money is used, despite what Adam, myself, or
any of
the other maintainers might want.
Do we know that it FSF will not agree to handle collection and
distribution on the maintainers' behalf?
Adam is GNUstep's chief maintainer. Doesn't he have final say on the
project, for better or worse?
Changing the management structure of GNUstep is yet another different
aim to marketing GNUstep. Again, I am not sure what people mean by the
GNUstep Foundation.
As I said in a previous post, I've been considering this for a long
time.
Cool. Explain it.
Because you said "Just to ape GNOME"? No, we're not "aping" anyone.
Also, I
don't consider having a similar name "aping" someone. I believed you
were
implying that we make all of the same mistakes the GNOME Foundation
has
made...
which I am opposed to. You don't like that explaination, tough.
Oh well. I hear "GNUstep Foundation" and I naturally think of another
desktop foundation which started from GNU developers, the GNOME
Foundation. In the absence of other information, I will think it is
similar and I suspect many other free software users will. At the very
least, this hypothesis should be tested before settling on that name.
No-one wants a marketing project to have an unmarketable name.
For things that the maintainers believe is worth it. It's been done
before
by
the FSF in the case of DGS (Display GhostSctipt) as well as other
things.
[...]
So, the FSF already did this function for us? Who tells them what
project need doing? The maintainers of the project or someone else?
How?
Who would tell the GNUstep Foundation what is needed? How?
Therefore, is the GNUstep Foundation intended to replace the FSF?
You seem to assume that I haven't investigated this.
Why shouldn't I? Most people who don't mention their research at all
don't have any. Most of my questions are for information you seem to
have, but I haven't seen. If you described this before, feel free to
reply with a reference.
The only organization
which would have fit the bill is the FSF and they currently
understaffed and
would probably not want to take on the extra responsibility given
that they
have not done this FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT EVER except for GNU-Hurd.
FSF is understaffed, but any GNUstep Foundation is even more
understaffed right now. Would likely Foundation staffers be interested
in doing GNUstep-related work for FSF? Is that possible? What did the
GNU Volunteer Coordinators tell you?
FSF have spent money funding GNUstep development. FSF accept donations
specifically for the Free Software Directory and GPL Compliance Lab on
https://agia.fsf.org/donate/directed-donations/ - Why are these not
taking on extra responsibilities for projects other than GNU-Hurd?
You say "probably" - did you ask them, or are you predicting?
Can you explain why you rejected SPI as a project host?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
LinuxExpo.org.uk village 6+7 Oct http://www.affs.org.uk