[Consortium] problem about inclusion of Ubuntu
jaromil at dyne.org
Fri Mar 24 09:59:17 EST 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
hi Ivica and all,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:19:29PM -0500, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
> Speaking of gratitude, Ubuntu is currently running on my Linux box. It
> has helped me produce/perform several of my works, and I am sure that
> I am hardly alone in using it. Hence, we could easily say that a
> number of Linux audio members may feel the same way about Ubuntu as
> you do about select member projects/people.
why do we need to have this abduction now?
i find the above statement quite depressive, when given by the
linuxaudio.org director, i'll explain why:
there are many needs, many people and many distributions.
consider that Ubuntu is not oriented to multimedia nor is properly
prepared for it: needs quite some re-configuration (which is yet another
debian->ubuntu->whatsnext derivate then?).
so to pinpoint projects responsible for its usability in audio i reckon
after our discussion that ubuntustudio and some package mantainers
(marillat, agnula/demudi and debian mantainers etc.) should be
considered more than the omnipresent brand you proudly show on your
Mako Hill says about Ubuntu that yes is a fork but forking is not a
problem. i think it's right unless the branch grows more than the tree;
then we're gonna have a problem at the roots.
in order to properly recognize the communities and developers that
really make things possible, i suggest you take more care to look into
the bush Ivica, we need this for the good of our own consortium members.
> > now i look forward to efforts in fostering development!
> > any ideas in mind? money is not the best way IMHO.
> free hardware, etc.), so if money is an issue, then the consortium has
> already been tainted...
i'm not talking about tainting :) money is just money we are not
barefoot hippies (it might be the case someone of us enjoy being it from
time to time?) anyway such a "money tainted" concept doesn't applies to
our consortium i guess.
what i mean with "not the best way" is that there are better sustainable
ways to exchange values at our stage, one of which is already well
active (but not properly considered, is my perception): visibility and
in fact, the value we are sharing already among each other is trust.
now go ask a gnu/linux mantainer of today what the word "trust" means
for him :) imagine all this armies of users we have behind here and how
much they trust us in running the software we publish...
> > linking with hardware manufacturers has been mentioned (and done?)
> > what else?
> Expos, conferences, presentations, outreach, recruiting, CD
> compilation, just to name a few. However, many of which were made
> possible only through some kind of external support (monetary or
that's merchandising. do we need it? yes, until a certain degree, if
there is someone good at it willing to do more, but such activities
should form a chapter that sustains itself IMHO.
> As mentioned earlier, if the project in question has a
> potential/merit, is compatible with our mission, is being used by
> someone productively and it therefore makes them aware of Linux as a
> viable sound platform, and finally the majority of the board is not
> opposed to its membership, why not?
> I think you may want to distinguish two things:
> 1) projects/people which/whom you find beneficial and therefore worthy
> of consortium
> 2) projects/people/whatever which the consortium as a whole finds
> The two will not always be equal for any of us, and as the consortium
> grows, chances are, we will have more and more of concerns similar to
> yours expressed by the existing membership. At that point we will,
> just like now, have to figure out what does the consortium as a whole
> think of that particular issue.
well then, my issue is just about inclusion of Ubuntu (and not
ubuntustudio) and of Mark Shuttleworth here.
we already sent out an announcement mail without discussing it first
here, i'm glad to see there is still some space for discussion.
so far i didn't read any mail here in favour of inclusion of Ubuntu,
only in favour of ubuntustudio.
i'm looking forward to hear what the consortium as a whole think about
> > do we distinguish between membership of communities, foundations,
> > individuals, companies etc. ?
> Yes, because every one of them plays a different, complementing role.
> This is something that my proposed next step aims to address by
> providing different levels of membership, including a continuation of
> the existing free membership...
so we go for a membership support scheme to gather some money for our
consirtium? yes, i think can be a good way! especially when someon here
has the money, which happened already, can really help.
i just hope that the most of the money out of that doesn't gets all
expended in beaurocracy and mantainance, but we can do some more...
well, let's see how many we are first :)
jaromil, dyne.org rasta coder, http://afrolinux.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Cryptographically signed mail, see http://gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Consortium