gnustep-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation


From: Alex Perez
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:26:10 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, MJ Ray wrote:

> On 2004-09-30 17:03:26 +0100 Gregory John Casamento 
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > --- MJ Ray <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> On 2004-09-30 14:11:48 +0100 Quentin
> >>> I'm all for it too. A foundation dedicated to GNUstep is probably 
> >>> the best 
> >>> choice from the legitimacy and visibility points of view.
> >> Can you explain why?
> > I can...  Because it would be managed by people who have little to do 
> > with the
> > actual GNUstep project.
> 
> Huh? I would expect that to make the Foundation less legitimate in 
> most people's eyes.

Well, I disagree, but we're allowed to do that.

> 
> >> still waiting for Adam Fedor to say if he's asked FSF whether we can 
> >> do most
> >> of the tax-break stuff through them, without the overheads of our own
> >> corporation.
> > [...] take
> > control out of the hands of those who have the most to do with the 
> > project, no
> > disrespect intended to RMS or the FSF.    I'm really not sure what 
> > thier
> > response will be.
> 
> It need not remove control. It would surely remove some bureaucracy 
> from the developers. Let's not prejudge their response if we don't 
> know. I know GNOME broke away, but they are a special case in some 
> ways. I will go read up on their foundation a bit. If anyone has a 
> good reference, please tell me.
> 
> >> If visibility is the concern, does this need to be "GNUstep 
> >> Foundation"
> >> rather than "GNUstep Marketing Foundation" or "GNUstep Promotion
> >> Association"?
> > Similar to the GNOME Foundation and the Apache Foundation, yes it 
> > does.
> 
> Why? Just to ape GNOME?
No, because it's the most logical name. "The <foo> Foundation" is 
extremely common.
> 
> I worry that marketing is trying to lead development, instead of 
> assisting it. My question about verifying the suggested problems has 
> gone unanswered as yet.
The GNUstep foundation will not exist to dictate the actions of the 
GNUstep developers. We can learn from some of the GNOME FOundation here, 
as Gregory previously mentioned.
> 
> >> This discussion seems to be cc'd to a gnustep-dev list: is that in 
> >> the gnu.*
> >> newsgroups too?
> > The feeling was that not enough people were on the 
> > address@hidden
> > list yet.
> 
> I wanted to know whether I can read gnustep-dev as a newsgroup, not 
> why this was cc'd.
Gmane carries it.






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]