Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
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.
This is not the case.
In any case, we encourage discussion on all issues, even on the nature
of the "association" which is being formed (see the mail from Fred
Gleason).
If you don't want to subscribe, so be it. But don't come back later
accusing anyone of keeping discussions "closed". And don't whine if I
forget to put you in Cc:.
> 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.
What's *exactly* the difference from a Consortium?
Do you think that natural persons don't have their own agenda? Or
they don't work for companies? Or they couldn't be a part of the
consortium as natural persons but put their company's agenda forward?
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*?
Yes, in the widest possible sense of "creating" (which is not only
writing code, although this is of course a very important part).
And of course, focusing on a press release *title* is quite an
interesting way to discuss the goals and workings of any organization.
Do you usually reply to e-mails on the basis of the Subject: line ?
Who will be given credit if the linux audio apps
become widely used?
The consortium? It's members? Which members?
I suppose that intelligent people will give credit to the
applications' authors, to documentation writers', to events'
organizers, etc, etc.
The problem is that projects aren't organisations
from a legal point
of view.
Not all of them.
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.
Which additional protection, *exactly*?
Problems such as those Fred pointed out could be
easily avoided.
Please show how.
The problem with the domain is - the term
'linuxaudio' has become a
"trademark", sort of.
Sort of, exactly.
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.
As I already told you, I'm more than willing to propose, as soon as
the voting rules are established, that specific subdomains of
linuxaudio.org be devoted to such services.
I personally won't have the time to work on the actual services. I'm
confident that willing people will do that. Are you volunteering?
Unfortunately this isn't happening. It puts a
consortium of
companies in the spotlight while keeping the community aside.
Of the 18 members currently listed on:
http://linuxaudio.org/en/members/index.html
we have:
- 10 Libre Software projects (AGNULA, ALSA, Ardour, Audacity,
dyne:bolic, GStreamer, Jack, Jamin, Plugin.org.uk, Rosegarden)
- 2 companies which are directly involved with Libre audio
applications (Fervent Software, Linux Audio Systems)
- 2 companies (Mandrake Soft, 4Front Technologies) which might not be
*so* directly involved, but have contributed to Libre Software in
general;
- 4 companies (Boost Hardware, Core Sound, Lionstracs, Mirror Image
Studios) which have showed interest in Libre Software and are
providing customers with GNU/Linux based audio systems;
I honestly can't see how the companies are put into the spotlight
(supposing this is wrong "per se", something I don't believe).
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.
You underestimated it in the first place, given the fact that
linuxaudio.org has been free for a long time.
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.
Again: I'm more than willing to propose the other consortium's members
to provide hosting space for such services. Are you volunteering to
maintain them?
bye,
andrea