14 Jan
2004
14 Jan
'04
8:20 a.m.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 12:10:52PM +0000, Daniel James wrote:
there is an argument that once the project has launched, it is
too late.
without wider community discussion, the accusation - rightly or
wrongly - is that it is exactly that: a cabal. How can we join something
that doesnt exist and that we havnt been told about? Its all a bit
surreal.
So how do i join? You need a european sound engineer perhaps.
As you havnt made a case, i couldnt comment on whether the project
is needed. And we are all doing this on our own time...
Ok, although i didnt say so, i was referring to the proaudio
industry, which i view as being quite different. I agree that
the work done by companies such as SUSE on system infrastructure
is valuable.
But the last few months has seen a big increase in corporate
stakes in linux. I beleive that the controversies are only just
beginning to be felt. There has always been disagreement over
how much their involvement is a good thing. The main danger for
me is that commercial pressures inevitably produce systems similar
to other existing systems aimed at the lowest common denominator.
Would you mind
putting your case to the wider community here?
It's my intention to do that with the launch of the project later
today.
Marek has objections which appear to have some
weight
Only if you don't know what we're doing. Given that the project isn't
even underway yet and has only been in preparation for the last
couple of weeks, it's premature for Marek to attempt to both force
the direction of the project and prevent the site from being
launched. He wanted the domain name himself for a different site, but
he didn't bother to register it. but
i'm sure i'm not the only one who doesnt really know what is
going on here.
Hence the need for the launch to be done properly, which takes time of
course. As I explained to Marek, I'm not going to launch a project
with zero community support. All I've been doing in the last couple
of weeks is putting the idea to the LAD members that I know (or know
by their software), and asking for their support. We can now launch a
project with 17 members organisations rather than zero members, which
in my view is now far more likely to succeed. It's not a cabal, and
we haven't stopped anyone from joining. It is very
important that representation of linux audio to the outside world
is done correctly. It is not an easy thing to do.
You're quite right, especially as there is little financial support
for advocacy work. I'm launching this on my own time and funding it
out of my own pocket, but after that it's up to the management board,
representing the membership, to decide if I need to be replaced as
Director. But someone has to get the project started. corporate involvement is also pretty
controversial.
Corporates are already critically involved in Linux audio. Andrew
Morton is paid for his kernel work through OSDL - check their
membership list. ALSA is supported financially by SUSE, owned by
Novell. These firms are as corporate as it gets.
What matters to me is that corporate interests don't overrule other
interests. Linuxaudio.org is mostly composed of libre software
projects, who get a seat on the management board, just like companies
- regardless of size. If you check the management boards of
organisations like OSDL or CE Linux Forum, you'll notice that libre
software projects don't get any representation there at all.
I'm not sure its a fair comparison.
I'll wait until your announcement. But i'm sorry that you
dont appreciate the danger that you are alienating people here
by doing things behind closed doors. I cant imagine why you chose
not to discuss it openly. Dont forget that community
is what makes linux what it is.
-------------
i just saw the url posted by Fred Gleason.
the aims are stated as:
The aim of the Linuxaudio.org consortium is to
promote and enable the use of Linux kernel based systems for
professional audio use.
Thats ok for a press release, but what does it mean in practice?
Its way too vague. What exactly are you promoting?
Its also a very wide range of companies you have there - too wide?
No offence to these companies, but do i really want Mandrake and
4Front speaking for me?
cheers
--
Tim Orford