Consortium

consortium@lists.linuxaudio.org

462 discussions

by Will Godfrey

Just seen the link on LAD. I hadn't realised this list existed, and probably like most others had only a hazy idea there was some sort of organisation in place. To attract new people, might it be an idea to somehow get information out as to what is done behind the scenes? I don't know that I can offer much apart from morale support. -- Will J Godfrey {apparently now an 'elderly'}

3 years, 7 months

[Consortium] withdrawing

by Dave Phillips

Greetings ! Due to various factors I want to resign my membership in the consortium. Nothing dramatic going on, I'm simply withdrawing from a number of comm channels where I'm no longer participating. Please advise if there's anything else needed to complete the process. My thanks to you all, may you all continue with the fine work you've offered to the Linux audio communities. Best regards, Dave Phillips

4 years

[Consortium] My messages to LAA are blocked

by Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas

Hi, The subject says all: my messages to the mailing list linux-audio-announce are being blocked. Regards, Pedro

4 years, 7 months

[Consortium] New Session Manager removed from LinuxAudio Github Account

by Nils Hilbricht

Dear Consortium, Effective immediately, "New Session Manager" has been removed from the linuxaudio.org Github repository. Announcements will no longer be made from software(a)linuxaudio.org. All references to the linuxaudio.org domain or consortium have been removed from the code. New URLs: https://new-session-manager.jackaudio.org/ and https://github.com/jackaudio/new-session-manager Yours, Nils

4 years, 10 months

[Consortium] Recent contentious activity on the consortium and LA* lists

by Ivica Ico Bukvic

Consortium members and fellow Linux audio enthusiasts, Thank you for your ongoing commitment to the Linux Audio Consortium. As you may be already aware, recently we have had an uptick in contentious correspondence among broader community members that has spilled over into community's mailing lists. Please note that I am not here to elaborate on this contentious activity nor on who or what may be right or wrong. Instead, allow me to use this opportunity to remind you of the purpose and the role of the Consortium. As a volunteer-run initiative, the Consortium's sole goal is to support all constructive efforts related to promoting and strengthening Linux as a compelling platform for audio-related work. To this end, we support the community by providing online resources, including our website and mailing lists, as well as by promoting the conference. When it comes to member projects, allow me to emphasize that the Consortium does not take sides and that we have neither the interest nor the capacity to manage conflict. Similarly, while member projects are welcome and encouraged to share our logos and link to our page, we do not approve of any statements of implicit or explicit endorsement by the Consortium without the prior review and approval by the Consortium's leadership. Lastly, please note that we will take every reasonable measure in our power to ensure that the communication channels maintained by the Consortium volunteers remain constructive and civil. Therefore, we will without hesitation moderate posts and suspend memberships from any member whose participation does not meet these criteria. Thank you for your consideration. Best, Ico -- Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A. Director, Creativity + Innovation Co-Director, Human Centered Design iPhD Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology Virginia Tech Creative Technologies in Music School of Performing Arts – 0141 Blacksburg, VA 24061 (540) 231-6139 ico(a)vt.edu www.icat.vt.edu www.performingarts.vt.edu l2ork.icat.vt.edu ico.bukvic.net

4 years, 10 months

[Consortium] Ongoing harassment

by Filipe Coelho

Hello. I just want to make the kind people here aware of the ongoing harassment against me by certain parties. This now was forward to me by the CEO of MOD Devices, a company I work for at the moment. (Some content in Portuguese, as both me and Gianfranco speak that language). While NON remains offline, me and all others that do Linux audio development have been quietly minding our business. I do not know who the sender is, but surely this is not okay. I am posting this here since there are even links to this very mailing list on the original email. And it is relevant to the story anyway. On 09/03/21 11:15, Gianfranco Ceccolini wrote: > fala Filipe > > olha só o que estão me mandando... > > Best regards > > Gianfranco Ceccolini - Founder & CEO > +49 160 646 9313 > gianfranco(a)moddevices.com <mailto:gianfranco@moddevices.com> > > MOD Devices > Revalerstr. 99 > 10245 - Berlin > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: *John* <malmach(a)web.de <mailto:malmach@web.de>> > Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2021 at 23:32 > Subject: MOD Devices involved in the recent Linux Audio scandal? > To: Gianfranco Ceccolini <gianfranco(a)moddevices.com > <mailto:gianfranco@moddevices.com>> > > > Gianfranco, > > I'm sure you're aware of the disgraceful actions of your employee and > agent Filipe Ceolho with regards to exploitation of Linux Audio > developers. > > First he took control of LinuxAudio.org and the critical JACK project > under somewhat suspicious circumstances and more recently he took > control over the Non DAW project via aggressive tactics of harassment, > slander, deception, and abuse of power at his role in the Linux Audio > Consortium (which he claims to be the sole representative of, as a > dictator, without the consent of the other members of the Consortium). > > Here is what the author of the Non project had to say about it: > > https://non.tuxfamily.org/wiki/News <https://non.tuxfamily.org/wiki/News> > > Here is a recent discussion on the LAC mailing list about the subject: > > https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/consortium/2021-February/002187.html > <https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/consortium/2021-February/002187.html> > https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/consortium/2021-February/002192.html > <https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/consortium/2021-February/002192.html> > > And here are some discussions on the LAD mailing list about it: > > http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/READ-THIS-IF-YOU-CARE-ABOUT-FREEDOM-F… > <http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/READ-THIS-IF-YOU-CARE-ABOUT-FREEDOM-F…> > http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/NSM-fork-td110718.html > <http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/NSM-fork-td110718.html> > http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/Misuse-of-linuxaudio-org-consortium-t… > <http://linux-audio.4202.n7.nabble.com/Misuse-of-linuxaudio-org-consortium-t…> > > Given the fact that Filipe has leveraged his employment at MOD Devices > to legitimize his claim to power and justify his actions, how do you, > as the CEO of Mod Devices feel about this? > > MOD Devices, in particular appears to be a company whose entire > business model is based on appropriating the work of open source > software developers without offering them compensation. To the casual > observer, it seems that Filipe Coelho may be a plant/infiltrator put > in place to enable MOD Devices to take control over all the critical > subsystems in the Linux Audio space (presumably in order to generate > profit and/or inhibit competition). > > Perhaps there are some journalists who might be interested in putting > these developments before a wider audience... > > It seems like MOD Devices thinks they can beat Behringer at their own > game, but what will happen to your company when Behringer decides to > out-Behringer you? > > >

4 years, 10 months

[Consortium] Official fork

by Fons Adriaensen

Robin Gareus wrote: > I think it is entirely appropriate when high profile members of the > linuxaudio consortium announce a standard and use linuxaudio.org to > promote it. I disagree strongly. Such a move should at least be approved by the linuxaudio.org management board. If not, it amounts to using the consortium's name without any authority to do so. It doesn't matter how 'high profile' the persons involved are. No organistaion that takes itself seriously would allow that. > The alternative would have been to start a new organization (like > LV2 jackaudio, FAUST etc). Indeed, and that would be put that organization on a level playing field, as it should be. > Yet this would likely fragment the community further, which isn't > in the interest of linuxaudio.org. I don't want to be offensive, but that is the sort of argumentation used by the likes of Putin and Erdogan to justify themselves. Fragmentation and diversity of opinion are essential features of any community that is not run in an authoritarian way. Ciao, -- FA

4 years, 11 months

[Consortium] New Session Manager release statement

by Nils Hilbricht

Hello, New-Session-Manager maintainer here. I am not a member of the consortium so I have waited to register and speak here. It was requested, by a consortium member, that I quickly give a statement, which I happily will. "Linuxaudio.org presents" will not be used in the release announcement anymore. I already agreed to that before these current ML conversations. Everything else has been already said by the consortium members and I don't see any value to repeat here what I already publically wrote in other places. I will of course answer and write something again, if any consortium member has further questions. Greetings, Nils

4 years, 11 months

[Consortium] LA.org "official fork" software

by Spencer Jackson

It was asked that this discussion was moved to this list since it is meta to the LAD list itself. I will attempt to comply though this list has been inactive for nearly 3 years. The recent unfortunate situation highlighted by Jonathon Liles' lengthy rant in [LAD] regarding his Non-Session-Manager software and the fork called New-Session-Manager does raise some questions. Johnathon has a history of being difficult to work with, caustic in his writing, and I can understand the motives to fork, especially considering the lengthy time since any previous NSM release. I don't think the fork is the issue nor particularly germane to the discussion. I imagine the situation would have been avoided with some more cooperative effort from Johnathon, but I also won't criticize him too harshly for having a vision for his project and rejecting requests that didn't fit in that vision. While I do not subscribe to Johnathon's assignment of malice and subterfuge it does seem that the list moderators releasing a fork under the linuxaudio.org brand is probably overreaching the consortium's mission: "to promote and enable the use of Linux kernel based systems for professional audio use." I believe that releasing the software under the names of the authors' rather than under the would have helped make this situation look less like an attempt of the organization to replace a developers project without acknowledgement of his contributions. I'd like to politely request the authors of the New Session Manager refrain in the future from releasing software as official linuxaudio.org versions. It seems appropriate to me that this be written into the policies of the consortium to avoid future instances where developers may feel their software is being replaced by the organization itself. I am assuming the consortium would like to remain project agnostic rather than picking the winners and losers of which projects get the LA.org blessing. _spencer

4 years, 11 months

Re: [Consortium] LA.org "official fork" software

by rosea.grammostola

I second this request from Spencer Jackson. No other software is released by linuxaudio.org since it's existence. It looks like the developers of the fork are using linuxaudio.org to promote their fork above the original version of a fellow LAD developer, to help them gain control over the session API and to make sure their version of the software will be included in distributions instead of the original. The fellow LAD developer and a part of his community doesn't agree with the fork. But that's not the question here. It's the fact that the developers of the fork, make it look like the fork is officially 'released' by linuxaudio.org. The developers of the fork are using their roles at linuxaudio.org to promote their fork. I think this could be seen as a misuse of linuxaudio.org consortium for their own goals and the goals of their fork. It hurts the work of a fellow LAD developer. This is not wherefore the linuxaudio.org consortium exists. This conflict of interest should be avoided. The Linuxaudio.org consortium should be a organization which promotes linuxaudio in general, but should never choose one version of a application above a other version by a different developer. It should stay neutral in this. It's easy to fix this with a rule which states that linuxaudio.org doesn't release software itself and doesn't host software. It looks the linuxaudio.org consortium isn't that active anymore, which could also be a reason why these developers of the fork can freely release their software as a official linuxaudio.org version. Nobody prevents them from doing so. Therefor I think the developers of the fork should be avoid this conflict of interest themselves and show some maturity and wisdom, to stop releasing their fork as it where a official linuxaudio.org version. These developers have their own websites for their software applications and they do have the skills to organize a way to work on shared code on any github repository. It's easy for anyone these days to register a own repository on github, gitlab or a similar service. There is no practical need to host the fork on the github page of linuxaudio.org. At the end this is not about this particular forked software suite, not about the right to fork in general. This about keeping the linuxaudio.org neutral where it should be and to avoid that members/ moderators of the linuxaudio.org consortium use the consortium for their personal projects and goals. The linuxaudio.org consortium should project LAD developers, and certainly not become a competitor of them. All though it's not about the specific software suite (Non Session Manager) and this is not about forking. I challenge those people who find it hard to divide between the two, to take a other software project in their mind and to do a thought experiment with it. How would it be if the linuxaudio.org consortium would officially release a fork of your software you worked on for more the 15 years or your favorite software application or your favorite developer, while that developer and/ or you as a user doesn't agree with it? New-Ardour, New-Qstuff, New-Qtractor, New-Aeolus .... now officially released by linuxaudio.org! While the original LAD developer doesn't agree with this? That's in all cases unthinkable right?

4 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Consortium