Re: Meeting Minutes Published - March 29th, 2011

On 15/04/11 14:45, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 11:39 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
We wanted to discuss with someone involved in that space what our
options were.It's an informal chat about what could be done. Andreas
took on the action item, and chose to talk with Ryan because he knows
Ryan well.

If I had taken on the action item, I'd probably have asked Robert
McQueen or Murray Cumming because I know them well, and have had plenty
of interaction with them.

This does really just illustrate what I am trying to point out. Doesn't it make more sense to have a mailing list for all companies involved in GNOME to discuss things like this instead of asking specific people from specific companies? You would get much more feedback and a more general consensus.

We wanted opinion on how we could have the Foundaton provide what some
third-party developers were asking for. Andreas chose to talk to Ryan
about it. It's informal, and an information gathering exercise. Ryan
won't be the one making decisions in the end, the Board will be.

Sure. But the board then makes a decision based on one person's view, not the collective view of businesses around GNOME which could be offering such services.

We told Stormy last year at GUADEC that we really need a forum or way
for potential customers to contact businesses around GNOME and get
support for the GNOME stack. We have seen first hand how companies have
offered services when they don't have the expertise and subsequently
frightened off larger corporations as a result. We want to avoid this too.

That would be a problem here, especially if the list was filled in by
the companies themselves.

You need *some* dialog with companies otherwise you don't know what's on offer as a foundation acting on behalf of GNOME for small business.

Please can we have some open forum about this instead of expecting one
person in the community who isn't representative of all companies with
maintainers in those areas, being contacted?

He's not representing anyone, and he won't be a decision maker in the
process. The representatives would be contacted once we have a more
accomplished idea about this.

What's to decide?

The representatives which Ryan informs you about?

Idea about offering services? Surely asking many people yields better results than asking just one person?

But, at the end of the day, you can also help yourself by providing us
with your feedback, or better, stepping up to the plate and do the work
to fill those needs and help us help you.

Gladly, just let me know what you want feedback on. What work is needed?

I was actually planning on doing something with Stormy during the past year, but never got around to it (that's my fault of course).

Ranting and raving about how we want to have an informal chat with
someone about a topic you might be interested is counter-productive.

Where did I rant?

I actually suggested a more open forum to help you get that "informal chat" from more sources to help you make a more informed decision.

Returning to the topic at hand. Do any of the companies you mentioned
provide developer support for GTK+? I've had the experience of providing
developer support for Red Hat (that did include fixing Motif bugs...),


We certainly do of course.

I am confident Collabora and Igalia do or have, perhaps even Openismus. In the end, unless you ask *us* how can you know? I am guessing based on rumour and upstream contributions. You can't know for sure without approaching companies.

and most of the questions were about:
- migration from one platform to another

Do you have more context here, or an example even?

- best practices when needing to change the implementation

We can provide that (if you mean specific code bases like GTK+). Kris Rietveld (from Lanedo) even did a talk about it last year at GUADEC which might be available somewhere. He spoke about vendor specific branches and working with upstream repositories.

- (possible) bugs found in underlying libraries that (might) need
fixing, usually caused by bad or lacking documentation, or actual bugs.

What's the question here?

All of this is quite a different proposition from providing a turn-key
finished application, especially with the depth of the stack we provide.

Not sure what you're saying here?

I'm waiting to hear about your ideas on this.

The above is, at best, hard to interpret. If you have a formal list of things to ask, please make it public here and I can reply certainly.

Pleasant weekend all,


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