Re: Astonishment

[Alan Cox <alan lxorguk ukuu org uk>]

On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 11:10, Martin Baulig wrote:
> So is hacking on Mono not a contribution to GNOME, 

I don't think so. Its a contribution to MONO. I didn't list my kernel
development work as a GNOME contribution although its clearly rather
useful to GNOME to have a kernel. I suspect in a years time I'll also
fail the membership test given my current set of projects. However I
think thats a good thing not a bad thing. In ten years time do you want
GNOME administered by a bunch of old farts who are working on other
stuff but "Know what GNOME was about", or the people actually taking it
in new innovative directions and know what it actually -is- about at
that point.

Now if you are doing GNOME C# bindings then that probably is a real
GNOME contribution, you didn't make that clear so I may be assuming
things.

> However, my reaction to this rejection was that I asked the committee to clarify what is
> needed to become a foundation member, whether hacking on an application which has a GNOME
> UI is enough or not.  

Thats a good question. Its unfortunate that Mike resigned - its not his
fault if the guidelines are vague, he was just doing the job and doing
the best he can.

I'd suggest the board figures out what it meant perhaps ? Maybe if for
once it includes a "Mono" argument Miguel won't be listed as 'absent' or
'apologies'...

I have *zero* time for the people who flame the membership committee
though. Its either peoples own fault for not volunteering to help them
do the job, or peoples own fault for not helping make the guidelines
clearer.

Alan