[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation

From: Gregory John Casamento
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-marketing] GNUstep Foundation
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:24:29 -0700 (PDT)

See below...

--- MJ Ray <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 2004-10-01 19:47:25 +0100 Nicolas Roard <address@hidden> wrote:
> > [...], and most people's opinion on GNUstep is fuzzy at the best. When
> > they don't confond the project with WindowMaker they think it's a 
> > dead 
> > project.
> > If that sadden you, well, that's too bad, but that's the truth, and 
> > you know 
> > it.
> The fuzziness, yes. I've not really had many confound it with 
> WindowMaker recently: I think their market share has fallen too now. 
> Shouting loudly "we're not windowmaker, damnit" is just bizarre these 
> days. We've much bigger hills to climb.
> > The foundation and the marketing are not automatically tied (the 
> > foundation 
> > will probably not do the marketing itself after all, it will more 
> > likely
> > be a group of volounteers as today). But a foundation gives us more 
> > credibility, a central place to send/get money, etc.
> That is what you want, then: a credible place to send/get money. 
> That's probably worthwhile. It would help if we could get similar 
> clear aims from others and identify what we mean by "credible". (I 
> know that Adam posted some suggestions: thanks Adam.)
> > A foundation does not need to be a corporation [...]
> No, not in England either. All the US foundations I know well are 
> corporations, though.

In the US, Foundations must be corporations.
> > in the US and I don't know how it works here, but if Greg want do 
> > create a 
> > Foundation, I trust him. I think he knows what kind of work he expose
> > himself to.
> Unless I misunderstood how US corporations work, it needs more than 
> one person, legally. Then we have to think about credibility too. This 
> is probably making work for a lot of people: is it the best use of our 
> resources?

You misunderstand. :)   A corporation can be created by one person.  My
coporate entity, not to be confused with another which recently stole my
company's name, was formed by me, alone, in maryland, USA.   I however, have
never suggested that *I alone* form the Foundation.

Please note that in my previous posts I have indicated that this should be done
by a *group* of the maintainers, not me alone.   I am a maintainer, and I would
be happy to participate in such a venture. 

> As to trust... I think I tend to the opinion that was on my lecturer's 
> wall: "In God we trust: all others must bring data."

According to US law a Foundation is "investment of private wealth for the
public good" there are VERY strict laws and guidlines as to what a Foundation
can and cannot do with the funds given to it. 

Whether you trust me or not, is your problem.  I believe that number of
maintainers should do this. ;)

> > Although I agree that the exact roles of the Foundation needs to be 
> > more 
> > discussed and detailed, I really don't think we should use the FSF, 
> > because
> > - it's not the FSF role, they don't have manpower for that
> It seems clearly within the FSF role, according to the description on 

This is the general FSF mission statement.
> I don't know whether they have the manpower, but neither does the 
> Foundation yet.
> > - they are not as involved in the project as us (euphemism)
> This is why we need some control or commitment that money donated for 
> GNUstep will be used for GNUstep. I think English law normally 
> restricts use of directed donations to non-profit groups, so you can't 
> spend them on other things. You can spend general donations on 
> anything. I'd need to check to be certain of that, but I'm pretty 
> sure. Does US law have similar provisions? 

I'm not sure what provisions you're speaking of.  However, as I mentioned above
there are restrictions as to what can be done with money contributed to a
Foundation.  I will try to find them. 

> If so, do we just need confirmation that the chief maintainer's decision is 
> final?

Final in what sense?  On the project, yes, Adam's decision is final.   

I will not start a Foundation alone.  I would like more than one of us to be
involved in this.   

I agree, in principal that we should talk to the FSF just to see what they say
(even if the answer is ultimately "NO") and research SPI which I didn't know
about until I asked Jeff in #gnustep to see if that's appropriate for our


Gregory John Casamento 
-- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A Maryland Corporation)
#### Maintainer of Gorm for GNUstep.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]