Consortium

consortium@lists.linuxaudio.org

462 discussions

by Marek Peteraj

> when the new LAD site is up, i will suggest LAUD as the new > general-purpose acronym for the community around the lists. however, > for practical reasons, i would like to retain LA[DAU] as shorthand > for the individual lists. those who don't like the accidental > connotation can spell it out :) > i'm with andrea in that changing the name is not going to change the > attitude. "Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)" Lad Lad, n. OE. ladde, of Celtic origin; cf. W. llawd, Ir. lath. root123. Cf. Lass. 1. A boy; a youth; a stripling. ``Cupid is a knavish lad.'' --Shak. There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves and two small fishes. --John vi. 9. 2. A companion; a comrade; a mate. Lad's love. (Bot.) See Boy's love, under Boy. "Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)" Lad Lad, obs. p. p. of Lead, to guide. --Chaucer. "WordNet (r) 2.0" lad n 1: a boy or man; "that chap is your host"; "there's a fellow at the door"; "he's a likable cuss" syn: chap, fellow, feller, gent, fella, blighter, cuss 2: a male child (a familiar term of address to a boy) syn: cub, laddie, sonny, sonny boy I'm not sure LAUD is the right abbrev. since LAU stands for users, LAD for developers. The interpretation could be misleading. Linux AUDio Linux Audio Users Developers + LAD has been here since 7 years or so, i don't think it's worth changing it. People got used to it. There are some very cool female linux audio developers, there's Melanie, the author of DJPlay IIRC and there's Alicia(don't know her family name) doing some very cool physical modelling research. Marek

22 years

[Consortium] linuxaudio abbreviation

by Brian Thomson

Another suggested abbreviation for Linux Audio Developers: LAUD. As in "Oh, LAUD, why isn't this bloody thing working?!?" 8-/ Cheers, Brian Thomson (new member) -- (this is not a signature)

22 years

[Consortium] re: organisations

by Marek Peteraj

> > But what will it solve?If part of linuxaudio's agenda is to get > > funding to be used for the > enhancement of the pro-audio development platform on Linux then having a > formal organization is essential. In which sense formal? Does it solve the legal issues? > Companies and persons who would want > to sponsor such things needs someone to make an arrangement with. > That is why GNOME has the GNOME Foundation, Ogg has Xiph and is why we > have OSDL. Sure, i know, but i was more interested to know how the legal issues involved in the establishing of an organisation will get solved. AFAIK GNOME Foundation and Xiph are both official 501(c)(3) non-profit organisations. Its members are natural persons. Marek

22 years

[Consortium] re: linuxaudio.org

by Marek Peteraj

> > I'd like to have a clearer understanding of what the legal> > > situation of the Consortium is (or is planned to be). > At the moment it has no legal status, in any country. This is what I > was planning: > 1. Register post office box (here in the UK) as the contact address of > the linuxaudio.org consortium (I've sent off the forms, I'm just > waiting for the Royal Mail to do their bit). It would be great to > have an office for the project and staff, but realistically the > resources aren't in place yet. <snip> > From there on my management role will end, as democratically speaking > I wouldn't be able to supervise myself. It's then up to the > Management Board to decide if they want to form a legal organisation, > replace me with someone who could do a better job etc etc. But if your role would end, and you wouldn't be able to supervise, who would handle the post then? > 2. Contact all the member projects to make sure they have named a > representative for the Management Board, subscribe these people to > the Management mailing list, and announce the formation of the Board. Consider it a troll (again) but i have to say this: >From a legal point of view, it's just a bunch of projects and companies listed on a site, the domain is entirely in the hands of Daniel. I just can't understand why there's a need for a virtual consortium under a such attractive and useful domain. An organisation should be the last step in promoting linuxaudio. There are lots of issues which need to be solved before an organisation can be established. And i fear that it will involve another mailing-list, what's worse, a private one. The managment board mailing list. As the software is open source itself, why is there any need for private mailinglists? Is there anything we should hide? > On the subject of subdomains, I think it's a good idea, but I am keen > to avoid duplication of effort. <snip> > As for the domain name, I did register it myself and it currently has > my home address on the WHOIS records. As soon as I know what the post > office box number is, I will change the records. There has to be a > named contact for billing and technical though, so if no-one objects > I'll leave myself as the contact for billing for now. > I don't want > the domain to expire in a couple of years time because no-on else > remembered to renew it! Seems like all my words were worthless. I'd register it and redirect it to LAD (and LAU) homepage first. Then i'd just pester Joern with the plans i have mentioned before. Worst case scenario - it would end up pointing to LAD and LAU homepage. Marek

22 years

[Consortium] Re: [linux-audio-user] LOCAL: SoundsExpo2004 was Links for 'Made with Linux' music

by Daniel James

> wondering which would be the > best day to attend > > Will you be there for the entire three days? Yes indeed. > I know it won't be on the scale of the ZKM LAD conference with > lectures and webcams It's a very different kind of event. The organisers claim there were 6000 visitors last year, and they are hoping for 8000 this time. These people are audio specialists but they don't necessarily know anything about Linux - if they have heard about it, they probably haven't actually seen it. There hasn't been any Linux or other libre software there before, as far as I know. > I'd really like to come and see some > Penguin audio in the flesh, and maybe get some hints and Agnula 1.1 > CDROMs (if they are available). Damien Cirotteau is scheduled to be there to represent the Agnula project. Cheers Daniel

22 years

[Consortium] Re: linuxaudio.org

by Marek Peteraj

> 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. Joern, grep in your archives (august, september) for my proposal. But let's not call it "corporate", i would call it "identity of a community" > in the same move, i like andrea's offer of subdomains a lot. > in my personal view, something like the following would be perfect: > linuxaudio.org (to become a portal with links to all the sub-domains) Linuxaudio.org should be about LinuxAudio, it makes no sense to promote linuxaudio if any type of organisation gets a better promotion than linuxaudio itself. > lists.linuxaudio.org (what is now the administrative part of the lad page) with a neutral 'linux audio advocacy' mailing list which would serve as a meeting point for the members of an organisation and linux audio developers and users to discuss various opportunities of linuxuaudio promotion. > consortium.linuxaudio.org (what is now linuxaudio.org) > community.linuxaudio.org (news about meetings and events, maybe a > user-driven news portal in the future) organisation.linuxaudio.org should be devoted to an organisation backing the linuxaudio efforts, www.linuxaudio.org should be about the community. > software.linuxaudio.org (dave's site) > documentation.linuxaudio.org (all the stuff from patrick's site, > alsa-wiki, presentation material, press coverage, and whatever useful > remains after cleaning up the lad page) > alsa.linuxaudio.org (a link to the alsa site) > jack.linuxaudio.org (a link to jackit.sf.net) > ladspa.linuxaudio.org (a link to ladspa.org and plugin.org.uk) > i don't really care whether these are subdomains or directories, but i > would love to see all the major linux audio sites (that relate to more > than one project or, such as jack, provide an infrastructure of sorts) > collected here and maybe share some common looks. A unified and appealing design is what will help to promote linuxaudio. > 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, That was what i was proposing all the time, to make a unified infrastructure with official "entrance" http://eca.cx/lad/2004/01/0160.html - see bottom http://www.eca.cx/lad/2004/01/0121.html Linuxaudio.org should *not* be about private efforts. Linuxaudio.com unfortunately is about private efforts currently - for example. > I'd like to have a clearer understanding of what the legal situation > of the Consortium is (or is planned to be). I do understand that > Daniel James is *very* busy preparing the booth at the Sounds Expo > 2004, so we might as well stop making noise and wait for some answers > before going on (I'm not trying to pressure Daniel or anybody else, I > just believe in making small steps and fixing bugs/problems when they > arise - the legal status of the Consortium in all of this discussion > is, if not a bug, at least a point of uncertainty I'd like to see > resolved as soon as possible). As someone who has a degree in law, i'd be very interested to see how this gets solved. I wasn't proposing a non-profit organisation (a legal entity) consisting of natural persons by coincidence. But it's still the last step in linux audio promotion. To provide an insight into the future: A formal organisation(from a legal point of view) would/could later provide services such as sf.net. Projects with sublinks such as jack.linuxaudio.org would later become hosted projects. Since the organisation would be non-profit, the possibility of providing such services would depend on sponsorships and grants. In order to accept them, it needs to have a legal status. > > no, serious, it's not a good idea imho to let go of the LAD acronym > > since it's well introduced and widely known, but it does not have to > > play a central role here - just "LA" or linux audio is fine. > It must be said that LAD - in the sense of "Linux Audio Developers" - > puts all the attention to the developers. Whilst I do believe this > latter are of the utmost importance to spreading Libre Software into > the audio domain, we shouldn't forget that the task will need many > other competences besides coding - even more so when you think that > these competences are exactly those Libre Software projects always > have difficulties attracting: technical writers, graphic artists, > event organizers, and so on and so forth. My point was - whatever it is it's still Linux Audio *. Linux Audio Developers, Linux Audio Users, Linux Audio Projects, Linux Audio Applications, Linux Audio Advocates, etc. So the term "linuxaudio" is *very* important here: 1. You just need to know one word to find everything related on the web, whoever you are(developer, user). 2. It must be easy to remember. 3. It has to identify the community and its projects. > > > I've been promising to do a dynamic, user-maintainable version > > > of Dave's app listing for oh, a couple years now... > > > What were/are the exact requirements of such an application? > > We discussed some requirements a long time ago on LAD and/or LAU, > > I forget. I put up a quick mockup on my website and have done nothing > > since then. > Basically it's a basic content management system. <snip> > registered users can: > - post entries for new software > - post updates on software entries It's important that anyone can submit new entries or updates of sw. Let's not pester them with registration if they want to help by providing information. :) <quote> > community.linuxaudio.org (news about meetings and events, maybe a > user-driven news portal in the future) ... > > > I've been promising to do a dynamic, user-maintainable version > > > of Dave's app listing for oh, a couple years now... > Basically it's a basic content management system. ... </quote> and the LAD homepage. It's important to see the whole picture. Those are all building blocks to one unified infrastructure called "linuxaudio". The aim should be to 1. work out that infrastructure 2. work out the (webbased) implementation of that infrastructure Last note: there won't be many music industry companies wanting to step in for a simple reason - the nature of open source. Our aim should be to promote linux audio to attract new developers so that it would accelerate the development of linux audio applications, attract new audio users by providing them with a set of apps/tools they like/need to use. Having a large userbase will allow linux audio developers to start their own successful companies. Marek

22 years

[Consortium] demographics

by R Parker

Hi, I'm thinking the consortium could provide some simple demographics that provide an indication of the number of Linux audio users. Maybe start with a simple page and a link to Joern's mailing list subscription count. It's easy to imagine the content would become more useful with time and not to much effort. Maybe we could ask Demudi, Planet CCRMA, etc for download stats. Http stats for hits might also be interesting. The point being, if the cost for company X to port their products to Linux is $15,000.00 U.S. they will require a consumer market of X users to justify the investment. During the last month, I've had conversations with several companies that have product for Mac OSX. They had two basic concerns. 1. "Linux has to small a share of the market to justify an investment."[1] 2. "we're waiting for a DAW/Sequencer like X and then we'll port." It's not difficult to imagine that Linux owns a small share of market but I think it could be interesting to know where we stand and to make that information available to the public. NOTES 1. Of course anyone can contract a company to port and then license their product. Ron __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

22 years

[Consortium] Where is the quality?

by Jonas Seffel

This might not be the best list for sending this, but here goes: Where is the softsynths? Me and many other musicians miss quality softsynths. The only ones that I've found is amSynth and Hydrogen. I would also like to see a good sampler, I've found one that looks interesting - LinuxSampler, but it doesn't even have a GUI yet. Aren't there any LADSPA softsynths? Would be VERY nice to load up a synth from within Rosegarden/Muse. Anyways, things are looking better. The sequencers and audioeditors has come a long way, but where are the sound producing apps? (Please don't mention any soundfont players) /Jonas.

22 years

[Consortium] (no subject)

by Marek Peteraj

> I actually assumed this was a troll or joke. I'm very serious about this. > Daniel announces a project with the backing of a dozen or so linux audio > developers, but without discussing it on l-a-d and Marek conpains and > wants the domain for his own purposed For my own?? > which have the backing of zero > developers and > havent been discussed on l-a-d. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That 120+ linuxaudio.org thread wasn't enough? > which have the backing of zero > developers and You're right, why bother... Marek

22 years

[Consortium] linuxaudio.org

by Marek Peteraj

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. > > 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. > 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: "[linux-audio-announce] LINUXAUDIO.ORG CONSORTIUM LAUNCHED TO CREATE PROFESSIONAL AUDIO TOOLS Daniel James (Thu Jan 15 2004 - 16:04:08 EET)" Was a consortium really launched to *create*? Who will be given credit if the linux audio apps become widely used? The consortium? It's members? Which members? > However, once the management board is in place - > hopefully next week - they could discuss this issue. We certainly > don't want to put anyone off from joining. The problem is that projects aren't organisations from a legal point of view. 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. Problems such as those Fred pointed out could be easily avoided. The problem with the domain is - the term 'linuxaudio' has become a "trademark", sort of. 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. Unfortunately this isn't happening. It puts a consortium of companies in the spotlight while keeping the community aside. 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. 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. Marek

22 years

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