Active Topics
-
Porting apps to Leste (29)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 2 days, 18 hrs ago -
Install Fonts in N900 (68)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by teroyk - 3 days, 21 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to momcilo For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2011-08-11
, 12:47
|
|
Posts: 1,418 |
Thanked: 1,541 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#432
|
Originally Posted by Jaffa
I find it amusing that after all this time the fact that the maemo.org-related decisions are usually made in private, by the people who have actual administrative rights to the maemo.org infrastructure, is news to you
I find it very disappointing that this meeting wasn't pre-announced for wider community participation. Ironic that the discussion about changing the scope of the Council and the meaning of maemo.org to a more open and formal entity was happening in relative secret.
|
|
2011-08-11
, 12:49
|
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#433
|
Originally Posted by fms
The private would mean absence of irc logs. In any case I hope SD69 and others will soon come up with official proposal for further actions.
I find it amusing that after all this time the fact that the maemo.org-related decisions are usually made in private, by the people who have actual administrative rights to the maemo.org infrastructure, is news to you
__________________
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to momcilo For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-08-11
, 14:11
|
|
Posts: 1,513 |
Thanked: 2,248 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ US
|
#434
|
Originally Posted by momcilo
I will have a proposal, but there should not be just one and there should be an alternative so we can have a meaningful vote.
The private would mean absence of irc logs. In any case I hope SD69 and others will soon come up with official proposal for further actions.
|
|
2011-08-11
, 15:05
|
|
Posts: 1,513 |
Thanked: 2,248 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ US
|
#435
|
Originally Posted by Jaffa
The meeting was not secret and was mentioned by me (if you wanted to attend you could have), the discussion about changing scope and meaning went on in TMO (several times) and by me here where I said it would be discussed in the Council meeting and then there would be an election -
Dear Council,
I find it very disappointing that this meeting wasn't pre-announced for wider community participation. Ironic that the discussion about changing the scope of the Council and the meaning of maemo.org to a more open and formal entity was happening in relative secret.
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=383
No one objected then. And if you read carefully, then it is apparent that I am trying to fulfill council's responsibilities in this meeting and determine if it's possible for things to make things happen that people have been asking about. There was no decision made, and at the end I inquire wrt conducting an election coming up where I expect this will be addressed by the community. There is no conspiracy or cloaks and daggers here, please move on.
Originally Posted by Jaffa
Actually, it was the previous community discussion that made me raise the issue with X-Fade! I responded to community input here: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=399
(Finally) changes to the voting structure are happening. There's been lots of discussion on maemo-developers & -community about the limits and process changes which would be appropriate; but it seems that in the meeting SD69 & X-Fade were basically plucking figures from the air without any prior discussion or consensus?
Comments appreciated. TIA.
And one could see where he asked me to approve changes, and I declined to do so saying I had to confer with the other council members. This issue has been around for awhile, previous Councils could have went about making changes but they didn't, and you want to criticize me for bringing it up?
I'm all for a community decision on this issue. You can lead it if you want to help. The result has to be clean, quickly decided, and easy to implement. My personal opinion is that we also want a trusted community member (other than X-Fade) to get some administrative rights to do the promotions so that we are not dependent on his availability.
Your criticism, particularly of me for doing what i regard as fulfulling a council member's responsibilities, is unfair. I am working on behalf of the community, in ways that I have publicly stated repeatedly and consistently. If you have substantive input, then provide it, not petty procedural criticisms.
| The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to SD69 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-08-11
, 16:33
|
|
Posts: 415 |
Thanked: 732 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ Finland
|
#436
|
To improve communications and to enable wider community participation in IRC meetings could the council in the future send an email to maemo-community@ about upcoming meeting in IRC along with the proposed agenga? Meetings thread (with draconian moderation) here in addition to the email notification would be nice too.
Thanks.
Thanks.
|
|
2011-08-11
, 16:35
|
|
Posts: 673 |
Thanked: 856 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
|
#437
|
Originally Posted by SD69
When is the next Council meeting scheduled?
I will have a proposal, but there should not be just one and there should be an alternative so we can have a meaningful vote.
__________________
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html
|
|
2011-08-11
, 23:20
|
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#438
|
Originally Posted by SD69
Before we start proposing things blindly it would be useful to know what we are talking about. Could we ask Nemein to provide a breakdown of resources utilised per service (current as well as trends), ideally also broken down by platform? I mean things like what is the peak bandwidth requirements of repository.maemo.org, how much filesystem space it uses, how many CPU cycles the autobuilders eat and so on.
I will have a proposal, but there should not be just one and there should be an alternative so we can have a meaningful vote.
Also, we really need to get a clear answer on how long the Nokia repositories will stay alive and what happens after that (eg can we have a licence to mirror them elsewhere?), because without that content we're dead and there's no point discussing anything else.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2011-08-11
, 23:44
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#439
|
I agree with lma except for
In my opinion, worst case scenario (Nokia don't want to allow us mirroring Nokia repos) would be "omitting" them in official documents/talk, and relying on "second hand" availability of them (user-to-user distribution, personal wiki's informing about such things existing...).
Ugly, bad, etc., but just remember that it's only worst case scenario, and I'm not advocating doing so, nor suggesting that further whatever-name "Maemo (Foundation?)" should advocate it. I'm rather talking about reality, i.e what will probably happen if Nokia goes berseker with their repos, until we got open source alternatives/clones of mentioned content.
Of course I understand that Council don't (and shouldn't) feel comfortable with responding to such "just observations of reality", so I don't expect an answer and I'm not waiting for. And I'm not talking ironically.
"without that content [being re-mirrored] we're dead and there's no point discussing anything else".
Ugly, bad, etc., but just remember that it's only worst case scenario, and I'm not advocating doing so, nor suggesting that further whatever-name "Maemo (Foundation?)" should advocate it. I'm rather talking about reality, i.e what will probably happen if Nokia goes berseker with their repos, until we got open source alternatives/clones of mentioned content.
Of course I understand that Council don't (and shouldn't) feel comfortable with responding to such "just observations of reality", so I don't expect an answer and I'm not waiting for. And I'm not talking ironically.
__________________
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
| The Following User Says Thank You to Estel For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-08-11
, 23:57
|
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#440
|
Originally Posted by Estel
That won't help for autobuilding anything that build-depends on nokia-binaries for instance. Even if we go back to building in our own scratchbox installations and uploading binaries to the repository, packages that have runtime dependencies simply won't install (or users will have to track down the dependencies on secondary channels and install manually, that'll be fun).
In my opinion, worst case scenario (Nokia don't want to allow us mirroring Nokia repos) would be "omitting" them in official documents/talk, and relying on "second hand" availability of them (user-to-user distribution, personal wiki's informing about such things existing...).
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post: | ||
It would be interesting to learn what last point really means, since X-fade predicts shrinking of the community as a result of it.
http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html