Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 15 May 1998 12:30:51 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        John Kenagy <jktheowl@bga.com>, "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu>
Cc:        FreeBSD-advocacy <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Preliminary Tenets
Message-ID:  <19980515123051.N305@freebie.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980513231757.1336C-100000@barnowl>; from John Kenagy on Wed, May 13, 1998 at 11:22:59PM -0500
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.980513184820.1666A-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu> <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980513231757.1336C-100000@barnowl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 13 May 1998 at 23:22:59 -0500, John Kenagy wrote:
> Good start,
>
> But, watch out for two areas;
>
> (moved into place)
>
> On Wed, 13 May 1998, Jason C. Wells wrote:
>
>> - Duties
>>
>> The FreeBSD Advocacy Group shall have the duty to spread the word and
>> improve the user base.
>>
>> The Group shall be able to answer this question, asked by a perspective
>> user, "Why should I choose FreeBSD?"
>>
>> - The Group's Position (if not that of each and every member)
>>
>> The Group shall support freely available software and other free software
>> communities including the Free Software Foundation, Mozilla.org, Linux,
>> and the BSD variants. All free software communities have a vested interest
>> in cooperation.
>
> 1. Having a position of general "free software" advocacy is at some
> level in conflict with the active promotion of a particular "free"
> product. That needs to be thought out a bit.

I think there's a difference in intensity between advocating FreeBSD
and "supporting" (morally) the other groups.  The important thing is
to realise that we're bound to them in many ways.

>> The Group supports software licensing that makes source code available.
>> The Group is not formed for the purpose of advocating BSD over GPL. The
>> Group supports the FREEDOM of free software.
>>
>> The Group shall advocate the porting of applications to the FreeBSD
>> platform to provide a compelling reason to use FreeBSD and improve our
>> user base.
>>
>> The Group shall advocate the release of driver source code to enhance
>> hardware compatibility and improve our user base.
>>
>> The Group is formed to advance the FreeBSD user base. The Group shall not
>> officially engage in activities that detract from other communities. The
>> Group shall present FreeBSD as an alternative to FooSoft. The Group shall
>> not engage in "FooSoft Sucks!"
>>
>> - Powers
>>
>> Current members of the core group shall have veto power until such time
>> the the Advocacy Group has matured and can handle its own affairs. This is
>> to ensure that the Advocacy Group performs in a manner which is beneficial
>> to FreeBSD, Inc and the FreeBSD community at large.
>
> 2. Veto? I don't like that word - Why have and advocacy group at all?
> The core group could just do it. I think the core group's opinion
> should carry weight but veto?

Hmm.  The underlying idea is good, and at this point I think it makes
sense.  The question is, who determines when the group is mature?

>> The FreeBSD advocacy group shall be ruled by "oral vote". In the event
>> that a clear consensus has not been reached, talk some more and reach one!
>> :)

Oral?  Electronic!

>> - Unsanctioned Advocacy
>>
>> All members are invited to advocate FreeBSD in their daily affairs. The
>> opinions of members who engage in unsanctioned advocacy represent their
>> personal views and not necessarily those views of FreeBSD, Inc. To
>> represent an unsanctioned position as one that is sanctioned will be
>> considered inappropriate.

This point needs more spelling out.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980515123051.N305>