3 Mar
2004
3 Mar
'04
7:14 p.m.
Before
talking about an individual developer's
"responsibility" to do free work for a hardware company, we should
be talking about that developer's worth to the company.
Perhaps - but let me put it like this. The professional Linux audio
market is
currently so small as to be insignificant to a hardware
company. We currently rely on good will to get any loan hardware or
specifications. while i may agree with the general gist of marek's
first objection, it
seems to me he is (again) shooting the messenger here.
And you're again insulting me publicly, although i woudln't say a word
if you didn't know about my intentions long ago.
it is certainly more desirable to have vendors supply
drivers or
development samples of hardware without strings attached. but the fact is,
many don't.
That doesn't mean we should encourage *loans* for the purpose of doing a driver which
should be done by companies.
"You're going to do the driver for us, return the hw in a perfect condition and
as soon as possible."
They deserve a lot more than be treated like that by companies.
As i said before, all we can do right now is:
1. advise people to buy hw which already is supported. nice advertising btw.
2. require donations and specs for hw which isn't available
3. widen the userbase considerably, there's lots of tools and mechanisms that would
help us to achieve that.
if i understood daniel's intent correctly, he is
trying to provide a
*mechanism* for how hardware loans and/or donations should be handled.
marek is talking about *policy*. in good unix tradition, those should
kept separate.
Well i was talking about the *purpose* of hw loans, to be clear enough.
But i'd like to know how you distinguish a policy from a mechanism in this case,
Joern.
Marek
3 Mar
3 Mar
7:34 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 08:29:41 +0100, Marek Peteraj wrote:
That is not an insult.
- Steve
while i may
agree with the general gist of marek's first objection, it
seems to me he is (again) shooting the messenger here.
And you're again insulting me publicly, although i woudln't say a word
if you didn't know about my intentions long ago. 
7:34 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
Marek Peteraj wrote:
If you would like your agruments to be considered than do not bury them in such
nonsense.
Thanks,
Andreas
while i may
agree with the general gist of marek's first objection, it
seems to me he is (again) shooting the messenger here.
And you're again insulting me publicly, although i woudln't say a word
if you didn't know about my intentions long ago. 
10:39 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 08:29:41PM +0100, Marek Peteraj wrote:
i didn't got Joern's email, anyway it's good to keep the discussion
here, until is not a real rant. there is a good point about policy and
mechanism and i see the good unix tradition he's talking about.
Marek: just make a small effort to keep the discussion somehow 'clean'
from subjective (sym|anti)pathies, i say this for the sake of giving
some air to the good points you made with your first mail
(i really wish you would have won the contest you were talking about)
well ok, you know: i love you all :)
i know my enemies and they are not here, i hope you all agree on this.
still i see many different approaches among us:
there are some geeks peeking into their messed-up inboxes
there are managers looking for a cool domain and cheap visibility
there are free software enthusiasts
there are unemployed coders living day by day
there are some hitech audio enthusiasts
there are employees who can't code but are supposed to do software
there are business professionals diving in a futurable field
and each of us can be one or more of the above
(just excluding certain tuples who really can't come along)
now: let's try to be tolerant to each other.
tolerance is a key for all kind of good things, believe me.
we'll be moving in the same field, some of us have been doing that
allready for some time now. the best for sure is to come together.
let's make this effort, meeting in person once can also help IMHO.
all the best and goodnite to who's in CET
(is anybody here out of the so called EU?)
ciao
- --
jaromil, dyne.org rasta coder, http://rastasoft.org
if i
understood daniel's intent correctly, he is trying to provide a
*mechanism* for how hardware loans and/or donations should be handled.
marek is talking about *policy*. in good unix tradition, those should
kept separate.
Well i was talking about the *purpose* of hw loans, to be clear
enough. But i'd like to know how you distinguish a policy from a
mechanism in this case, Joern. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://gnupg.org
iD8DBQFARkSGWLCC1ltubZcRAhGeAKCrzcf/kYmPrdmuCvlb2Cu6T9NuUwCdHuF6
wt0F023NYe74APCAqDAyHvc=
=Kd7Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
9 Mar
9 Mar
11:57 a.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
>>>> "jaromil" == jaromil
<jaromil(a)dyne.org> writes:
let's make this effort, meeting in person once can
also help
IMHO.
Speaking about that (good idea) are there any news on the proposed
Linux Audio Consortium roundtable at the 2nd Linux Audio Conference?
P.S.: as far as I know, the name was changed from Linux Audio
Developers Conference to Linux Audio Conference just because Frank and
Matthias wanted to underline that this wasn't a developers' only
conference anymore.
bye,
--
Andrea Glorioso andrea.glorioso(a)agnula.org
AGNULA Technical Manager http://www.agnula.org/
M: +39 333 820 5723 F: +39 (0)51 930 31 133
"Libre Audio, Libre Video, Libre Software: AGNULA"
12:14 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
are there any news on the proposed
Linux Audio Consortium roundtable at the 2nd Linux Audio
Conference?
I think Frank and Matthias were receptive to the idea, but I don't
think anything was scheduled so far. At the very least we should
have a strategy meeting of some kind.
Cheers
Daniel
12:26 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
Hi Daniel,
you wrote:
We are in the final steps of fixing the programme right now; however, we had
not scheduled any "official" LA Consortium roundtable; instead, we have planned
to let a panel discussion take place on the last day (Sunday, May 2nd, around
3 PM). The topic for this discussion is not fixed yet (we thought about things
like "Linux audio - what's missing?" or "Is it a viable alternative to
Windows/MacOS X now?"), but I think we could merge our ideas and your interest
here somewhat.
What would be your topic suggestions for this roundtable?
Greetings,
Frank
--
Frank Neumann (Frank.Neumann(a)st.com), VIONA Development Center
STMicroelectronics, Karlstraße 27, 76133 Karlsruhe
are there any
news on the proposed
Linux Audio Consortium roundtable at the 2nd Linux Audio
Conference?
I think Frank and Matthias were receptive to the idea, but I don't
think anything was scheduled so far. At the very least we should
have a strategy meeting of some kind.
12:49 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
we had
not scheduled any "official" LA Consortium roundtable;
I don't think that matters if the subjects are being discussed anyway.
Perhaps we can organise a get-together for consortium members outside
of the formal conference timetable, eg a social event where we can
discuss ideas over dinner/beer/your refreshment of choice...
we
have planned to let a panel discussion take place on the last day
(Sunday, May 2nd, around 3 PM). The topic for this discussion is
not fixed yet (we thought about things like "Linux audio - what's
missing?" or "Is it a viable alternative to Windows/MacOS X now?"),
I think the very existence of the conference proves that it's a viable
alternative!
What would be your topic suggestions for this
roundtable?
I think an interesting question would be 'Should libre audio software
compete for mainstream users?' since this brings up further questions
about interoperability with proprietary software, ease of use versus
dumbed-down interfaces and so on.
Cheers
Daniel
12:34 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Daniel James wrote:
We could schedule such a meeting in one of the seminar rooms at ZKM.
They offer room for up to 10 people. Since this is anyway not a public
meeting, this size should be sufficient. After this internal strategy
meeting, public discussion could, as Frank suggested, be held in the panel
discussion on Sunday.
Matthias
--
Dr. Matthias Nagorni
SuSE Linux AG
Maxfeldstr. 5 phone: +49 911 74053375
D - 90409 Nuernberg fax : +49 911 74053483
are there any
news on the proposed
Linux Audio Consortium roundtable at the 2nd Linux Audio
Conference?
I think Frank and Matthias were receptive to the idea, but I don't
think anything was scheduled so far. At the very least we should
have a strategy meeting of some kind.
12:53 p.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
We could schedule such a meeting in one of the seminar
rooms at
ZKM. They offer room for up to 10 people.
Thanks! - this might be just right for a meeting of the linuxaudio.org
Management Board.
Since this is anyway not
a public meeting, this size should be sufficient.
I don't think we want to hold meetings in secret either, but of course
we do now have a structure for voting on matters of linuxaudio.org
policy.
Cheers
Daniel
4 Mar
4 Mar
11:37 a.m.
New subject: a few more rants...
it is
certainly more desirable to have vendors supply drivers or
development samples of hardware without strings attached. but the
fact is, many don't.
That doesn't mean we should encourage *loans* for the purpose of
doing a driver which should be done by companies. "You're going to
do the driver for us, return the hw in a perfect condition and as
soon as possible."
That's not actually what the companies I've spoken to have been
saying. In any case, given the small market share, the drivers are
worth far more to the community than they are to the company.
Cheers
Daniel
7592
days inactive
7598
days old
consortium@lists.linuxaudio.org
10 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Andrea Glorioso -
Andreas Kuckartz -
Daniel James -
Daniel James -
Frank NEUMANN -
jaromil -
Marek Peteraj -
Matthias Nagorni -
Steve Harris