The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to momcilo For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 12:47
|
Posts: 1,418 |
Thanked: 1,541 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#432
|
I find it very disappointing that this meeting wasn't pre-announced for wider community participation. Ironic that the discussion about changing the scope of the Council and the meaning of maemo.org to a more open and formal entity was happening in relative secret.
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 12:49
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#433
|
I find it amusing that after all this time the fact that the maemo.org-related decisions are usually made in private, by the people who have actual administrative rights to the maemo.org infrastructure, is news to you
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to momcilo For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 14:11
|
Posts: 1,513 |
Thanked: 2,248 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ US
|
#434
|
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 15:05
|
Posts: 1,513 |
Thanked: 2,248 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ US
|
#435
|
Dear Council,
I find it very disappointing that this meeting wasn't pre-announced for wider community participation. Ironic that the discussion about changing the scope of the Council and the meaning of maemo.org to a more open and formal entity was happening in relative secret.
(Finally) changes to the voting structure are happening. There's been lots of discussion on maemo-developers & -community about the limits and process changes which would be appropriate; but it seems that in the meeting SD69 & X-Fade were basically plucking figures from the air without any prior discussion or consensus?
Comments appreciated. TIA.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to SD69 For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 16:33
|
Posts: 415 |
Thanked: 732 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ Finland
|
#436
|
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 16:35
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#437
|
I will have a proposal, but there should not be just one and there should be an alternative so we can have a meaningful vote.
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 23:20
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#438
|
I will have a proposal, but there should not be just one and there should be an alternative so we can have a meaningful vote.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 23:44
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#439
|
"without that content [being re-mirrored] we're dead and there's no point discussing anything else".
The Following User Says Thank You to Estel For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2011-08-11
, 23:57
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#440
|
In my opinion, worst case scenario (Nokia don't want to allow us mirroring Nokia repos) would be "omitting" them in official documents/talk, and relying on "second hand" availability of them (user-to-user distribution, personal wiki's informing about such things existing...).
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: | ||
It would be interesting to learn what last point really means, since X-fade predicts shrinking of the community as a result of it.
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html