[Consortium] linuxaudio.org

Andrea Glorioso andrea.glorioso at agnula.org
Fri Jan 23 11:48:08 EST 2004

Marek Peteraj <marpet at naex.sk> writes:

> First i'd  like to  say, that   i'm  not going  to subscribe  to the
> consortium mailing-list, because as i see it, by subscribing to this
> ml i would silently agree to the idea of a consortium.

This is not the case.

In any case, we encourage discussion on all issues, even on the nature
of the "association"  which is  being  formed (see the  mail from Fred

If you don't want to subscribe, so be it.  But don't come back later
accusing anyone of keeping discussions "closed".  And don't whine if I
forget to put you in Cc:.

>> > So, with these sorts of issues in mind, would it be possible to
>> > characterize the group by means of a less intimidating term? 
>> > "Advocacy group" works for me (it is, after all, a purely voluntary
>> > association that carries no legal obligation with it), although 
>> > I'd
>> > be glad to talk about alternatives.
> The only alternative i see is a non-profit organization consisting of
> natural persons, a legal entity. 

What's *exactly* the difference from a Consortium?

Do  you think that  natural persons don't   have their own agenda?  Or
they don't work for  companies?  Or  they couldn't be   a part of  the
consortium as natural persons but put their company's agenda forward?

>> It is the case that we've already announced linuxaudio.org as a 
>> consortium. 
> This was another reason why i asked to postpone it.
> Just to demonstrate how easy it is to get confused:
> PROFESSIONAL AUDIO TOOLS Daniel James (Thu Jan 15 2004 - 16:04:08
> EET)"
> Was a consortium really launched to *create*?

Yes, in the widest possible sense of "creating" (which is not only
writing code, although this is of course a very important part).

And of  course,  focusing on  a   press release  *title*  is  quite an
interesting way to discuss the goals and workings of any organization.

Do you usually reply to e-mails on the basis of the Subject: line ?

> Who will be given credit if the linux audio apps become widely used? 
> The consortium? It's members? Which members?

I suppose  that  intelligent    people  will  give  credit   to    the
applications'   authors,    to documentation   writers',   to  events'
organizers, etc, etc.

> The problem is that projects aren't organisations from a legal point
> of view.  

Not all of them.

> Combining them with companies doesn't make much sense. A foundation
> would offer additional protection as it would consist of developers
> participating in linux audio projects which are subject to such
> additional protection.

Which additional protection, *exactly*?

> Problems such as those Fred pointed out could be easily avoided.

Please show how.

> The problem with the domain is - the term 'linuxaudio' has become a
> "trademark", sort of.

Sort of, exactly.  

> It represents the linux audio developers, the linux audio users,
> linux audio applications/projects.

> I hoped it to be a home for LAD, LAU and LAA, and to offer more -
> community news, documentiation and tutorials, etc.

As I  already told you,  I'm more than  willing to propose, as soon as
the   voting   rules are  established,   that   specific subdomains of
linuxaudio.org be devoted to such services.

I personally won't have the time to work  on the actual services.  I'm
confident that willing people will do that.  Are you volunteering?

> Unfortunately this isn't happening. It puts a consortium of
> companies in the spotlight while keeping the community aside.

Of the 18 members currently listed on:


we have:

- 10 Libre Software projects (AGNULA, ALSA, Ardour, Audacity,
dyne:bolic, GStreamer, Jack, Jamin, Plugin.org.uk, Rosegarden)

-  2  companies which   are    directly  involved with  Libre    audio
applications (Fervent Software, Linux Audio Systems)

- 2 companies (Mandrake Soft, 4Front Technologies) which might not be
*so* directly involved, but have contributed to Libre Software in

- 4 companies (Boost Hardware, Core Sound, Lionstracs, Mirror Image
Studios) which have showed interest in Libre Software and are
providing customers with GNU/Linux based audio systems;

I honestly  can't  see how the   companies are put  into the spotlight
(supposing this is wrong "per se", something I don't believe).

> I  was surprised to  see  how many of lad  subscribers  and you guys
> underestimate  the  issue  that  LAD is  not  "only a"  mailing list
> anymore.

You  underestimated it  in  the  first   place, given  the  fact  that
linuxaudio.org has been free for a long time.

> Just  an example -  2 job offerings were  posted  on LAD during this
> week. Having a job bulletin board  on linuxaudio.org would come very
> handy   for those searching   for  *linux audio*  related  jobs. Per
> analogiam, *linux audio*   users, developers etc   would find *linux
> audio* related information.

Again: I'm more than willing to propose the other consortium's members
to provide  hosting space for such services.   Are you volunteering to
maintain them?



More information about the Consortium mailing list