Re: New home for GPE?

Rene Wagner schrieb:
> On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 13:40 +0200, Nils Faerber wrote:
>> So the question is basically if anyone would object to this move?
> Yes, I do object against both the "move" and the approach you're
> taking here.

OK, let's see.

> As for the "move", it looks more like a (hostile) takeover. I don't
> buy the "run by the community". I haven't found an "Impressum" on
> linuxtogo.org, but according to the whois DB it's run by 
> kernel concepts GbR, more specifically by you.

This was the best way we could do it formally and has nothing to do with
any takeover. This is a gross exaggeration.

I am absolutely willing to explain this fact.
The reason for this is that someone has to pay for the server, right?
This does not fall of the stars or trees.
We tried hard to find sponsors for it but noone stepped forward without
seeing something. So we had to do it on our own. The best way, and most
cost effective, was to rent the server through our company. This does
not mean in any way that we own it, control it or whatever - please read
the explanation on LTG for that matter.

The formal imprint is still missing, yes. The reason for that is/was
that I am not sure what to write there. The platform and site is not, as
mentioned before, solely run by us. So we have to find a shared
liability model. But I think we will be forced to write a limited
imprint... but that is not for reasons that I would like.

> As I'm moderately sure you'll do the "move" regardless of what I say,
> I'm going to stop wasting my time arguing against it now, but I do
> ask you to leave the applications I wrote (gpe-screenshot, gpe-life,
> gpe-mileage) where they are.

That is not my choice, you have to ask George for that. I have no
intention to *remove* anything from hh.org. It is just that more
development and attention could take place at LTG.

> As for the approach, I don't think the "respond within a week or it's
> too late" [paraphrased] is appropriate. A proper approach would have
> involved contacting all present and past contributors (personally, they
> may not read gpe@ frequently) asking for their opinion.

Well, here you said it, what is the big deal about it?
I can only say: Thanks for the hint! I will try so, yes! I thought the
best way would be the mailinglist, I might have been wrong.

Probably you are right and we have to see what we can do about it, yes.
Compiling a list of people could become a problem though, but hey, it
can be done (BTW: Be assured that before thinking about it at all we had
already been talking with at least some people about it - especially
people like pb who contributed really *a*lot*.)

> Considering that this is the time of the year many people are on
> vacation I also think one would have to give contributors more time (4-5
> weeks) to respond.

OK, this is indeed true.
Then let's postpone this, say, for 4 weeks then, OK?

> Regards,
> Rene, with his GPE contributor hat on
Cheers (with simply having made a proposal!)
  nils faerber


PS: Frankly I am pretty annoyed but the tone that is frequently coming
up from people in the vicinity of hh.org when it comes to discussions
and problems.
>From experience nothing ever happens when only vague questions are
posted. So I formulated my proposal a little more decisive. But I want
to stress that I explicitely asked for comments.
It is impolite to then say that those suggestion will not be heard or
considered anyway!

What's going on people?
Didn't we, some time ago, want to work together on something? To create
something? And not debate and flame everything?
I am really quite disappointed at times over those threads.

-- 
kernel concepts GbR      Tel: +49-271-771091-12
Dreisbachstr. 24         Fax: +49-271-771091-19
D-57250 Netphen          Mob: +49-176-21024535
--