Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNOME Foundation Board Election Results

Posted by michael on from the gnews-you-can-use dept.

Anonymous BillyGoat writes "The results of the 2003 GNOME Foundation Elections have been announced. These are preliminary results, and will stand unless someone decides to challenge them. A notable exclusion from this year's list is Miguel De Icaza, whose candidacy application was rejected as it missed the deadline. In related news, barely a few weeks after the news of the death of GNOME hacker Chema Celorio in a sky diving accident, the GNOME community was shocked by the news of the sudden death of Evolution hacker Ettore Perazzoli."

11 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. Excluded? by KlomDark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can Miguel be excluded? Didn't he start the whole thing? That's be like excluding Linus from a Linux Foundation. Just makes the Gnome Foundation seem like a joke if they leave the founding member out.

    1. Re:Excluded? by azzy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, what would make it a joke is if they ignored all of their rules for someone, regardless of who that was.

    2. Re:Excluded? by pr0c · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ya but you also lose integrity by allowing people who don't meet deadlines to slip by. It is a lose/lose situation really. I'm sure Miguel will still be very involved.

    3. Re:Excluded? by the+gnat · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, what would make it a joke is if they ignored all of their rules for someone, regardless of who that was.

      "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
      -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

    4. Re:Excluded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes. And because alot of representatives at the UN don't even pretend to be democratically elected it is a hilarious one.

    5. Re:Excluded? by ebuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Airplanes don't wait for passenger 42 to come on board, even when passenger 42 is a politician or powerful businessman.

      Universities don't "reopen" enrollment for a tardy applicant, without compromising their perception of fairness.

      Deadlines exist. Mabye the years of missing them in software development has numbed us, but they still exist. And as much as I find it ironic that Miguel isn't on board, let's not cry that he deserves a spot when he couldn't be bothered to get his application in on time.

      If he was tardy in his application, that's not a pretty precedent to set as a board member. (Admittedly, I'd expect a few board memebers to be tardy at everything else, BUT the application process, hehehe)

  2. Sad by pavon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I remember right Ettore Perazzoli was also largly responcible for the GNOME Virtual File System code (transparently opening tarballs as folders, FTP etc) which in my opinion was the only good thing to come out of the Nautilus project.

  3. Re:Who cares about gnome? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 3, Insightful


    I use KDE, and I assume you do too given that it's the only remotely customizeable WM.
    I didn't before. I used to prefer Gnome over KDE, but I switched to KDE after the pile of dung that is Gnome 2.0 showed me that Gnome is a dead end now. What annoys me about the Metacity manifesto is how it ruined the future of what *had been* my preferred interface.

    I'd use blackbox or icewm, except that I hate the look and feel of NeXT that they try to emulate. It doesn't waste computer resources to have resize bars on *all* sides of a window. There's no reason to make you have to use a little button down on the lower corners.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  4. Dear /. by Nodatadj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    GNOME got a new logo 2 years ago...

    Not about time to change?

  5. Re:Who cares about gnome? by pyros · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Gnome took a turn for the worse when Gnome 2.0 was released and it hasn't recovered since.

    Matter of opinion. I happen to think the jump from 2.0 to 1.4 was the first big leap towards being useable on a personal desktop, and it's been getting better ever since. I think File Type application association sucked ass in earlier versions of GNOME. Nautilus has made considerable speed and memory improvements. The panel kicks butt. they used to have different kinds of panels you could add/configure. Finally in 2.4 they figured out that they're all just panels. So now it's one kind of panel you can put whereever you want, and you can put any and all available applets on it. Some people really hate metacity. I can honestly say that I've had no change in usage patterns or productivity during the transition from Enlightenment to Sawfish to Metacity. Now we have the emerging gstreamer audio/video subsystem for GNOME apps to hook into. Totem and Rhythmbox are pretty sweet. I still use xmms every now and then, but I like having my little systray applet for rhytmbox. (I never liked the xmms gnome panel applet)

    What exactly do you think got worse from 1.4 to 2.0?

  6. miguel still part of things! by Xtifr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He may not be an official member of the GNOME Foundation Board, but that hardly means that he's no longer a leader of the GNOME project itself. Let's keep some perspective here. I seriously doubt if anyone is saying, "he didn't meet the election deadline, we'd better shut off his CVS access." Or even, "we'd better stop listening to what he has to say."

    It's even possible that not being on the Foundation could allow Miguel to spend more time actually working on GNOME.