[Consortium] linuxaudio.org

Joern Nettingsmeier nettings at folkwang-hochschule.de
Wed Jan 28 17:50:10 EST 2004

Andrea Glorioso wrote:

> Joern Nettingsmeier <nettings at folkwang-hochschule.de> writes:

>>perhaps we could have two sections: free community sites and
>>commercial sites. 
> I fail to  understand how the distinction  could be made.  As long  as
> the produced software is Libre Software, the produced documentation is
> licensed  under either the GNU  FDL  (for technical documentation)  or
> under a  Creative Commons license (Attribution, Attribution/ShareAlike
> are my proposed choices) the distinction between "commercial" and "non
> commercial" becomes, IMHO, unuseful and *could* become unflexible.

you are right. ditch the idea.

still, it might be useful to somehow label "for profit" as in "this page 
might contain advertising hype and somebody's trying to make a living 
out of it" and non-profit as in "community or privately maintained site 
with no corporate or institutional backing".
this is not to create artificial divides, but just to avoid 
misunderstandings. i have absolutely nothing against people trying to 
get some money out of linux audio, but it is helpful to see at a glance 
whether a page is for profit or not (i tend to read pages differently 
depending on that), and whether somebody is speaking with a personal 
monetary interest.
but then, all this is probably taken care of by the imprint section of 
the websites, so we can just leave it to the site maintainers themselves.

>>i would like to see all parts of the community (LAD, linuxaudio.org,
>>younameit) share a common logo to generate some "corporate identity"
>>both for the members of the communities and visitors, without each
>>part implicitly having to endorse everything the other does.
> That's not so easy, I fear.  It can be made doable providing a very
> clear set of rules to abide to (and discussing them, of course).

yes. as i said, i was dreaming something up.
perhaps a nice "linux audio social contract", no longer than one page ?
(daniel, iirc it was you who complained about the gpl being too long and 
nobody reading it - i agree totally!)

but this probably justifies a new thread.

>>in the same move, i like andrea's offer of subdomains a lot.
> Just to be clear, in this moment it's more of  a proposal I will do to
> other consortium's  members.  I'm not  the owner of the linuxaudio.org
> domain - the owner  is Daniel James at  the moment, although I suppose
> it will  be passed  on  to the Consortium  as  soon  as the latter  is
> formed.
> Said that, as I already wrote, I will propose this subdomain project
> to the Consortium and vote for it.

great :)

> I'm not sure I understood what do you mean for "relating to more than
> one project".

i was trying to find a policy that will prevent a gazillion of 
application-specific sites from trying to get into the webring (as in 
<younameit>.sourceforge.net). so s/project/application should make it 
more clear.

> As for the common looks,  it would be nice,  but I'm not sure this can
> easily  happen   without  major manpower   (and   some nice diplomatic
> skills).

well, you are right, common looks is a bit much...
from my experience at the university, a corporate design is beyond 
diplomacy and well into the realm of "the art of war" :)

let's just come up with a logo and a nice webring banner that will mix 
well with whatever design the site has (such as tweakable colors and 
decent transparent anti-aliasing), perhaps even a black-and-white logo 
that can be colored any old way.

>>don't get me wrong, i'm not intending to force anybody in, or
>>annihilate people's private efforts. it's just a "would be nifty"
>>scenario to have everybody under one roof, and it has the nice
>>side-effect of alleviating the remaining paranoia against
>>linuxaudio.org :-D
>>i'm prepared to move the lad page over to linuxaudio.org if people
>>don't vote against it.
> I'd personally  love  it - but  I'd  like first to see  the Consortium
> legal status, wrt  its nature and its  statute, to be clearly  defined
> first.  This   is to  avoid  any incomprehension  (i.e.    any humanly
> avoidable   and understandable   uncomprehension,  we  neither can nor
> should worry about the rest).


yes, definitely.

"I never use EQ, never, never, never. I previously used to use mic
positioning but I've even given up on that too."
	- Jezar on http://www.audiomelody.com

Jörn Nettingsmeier
Kurfürstenstr 49, 45138 Essen, Germany
http://spunk.dnsalias.org (my server)
http://www.linuxaudiodev.org (Linux Audio Developers)

More information about the Consortium mailing list