Re: Women in GNOME (Was: Code Of Conduct)

On 6/1/06, Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com> wrote:
On 6/1/06, Anne Østergaard <anne oestergaard nu> wrote:
> tor, 01 06 2006 kl. 09:05 -0400, skrev Luis Villa:
> > On 6/1/06, Dave Neary <dneary free fr> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Luis Villa wrote:
> > > > Such a plan should be written by someone who has actually been
> > > > involved in IRC, our mailing lists, bugzilla, etc., *as a developer*-
> > > > which, sorry, isn't Anne. It will not work if it is not driven by
> > > > someone with such experience.
> > >
> > > That's not so. There's nothing preventing someone who isn't a developer
> > > from comping up with a credible strategy for getting more women involved
> > > in GNOME (although that's totally off-topic to the code of conduct
> > > discussion). Any such plan would have to appeal to geek women - so who's
> > > better placed to come up with a plan? A male geek or a female non-geek?
> >
> > A female geek?
> I would like to hear your definition of a geek, please.

For the purposes of this discussion, 'someone actively involved in the
development of our software through the traditional means used by our
community'. This need not be direct software development (as everyone
knows I do very little of that) but it does mean involvement in
creating the product that we ship, and it does mean at least some
participation in the mainstream of the community- desktop-devel-list,
#gnome-hackers, etc.

And I might add that the reason this is important is that it seems to
me insane that someone could devise policy to get people involved in
something they have not themselves participated in.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]