When to Have an Agenda
Recently I’ve found myself having to balance more precariously how I approach local community based activities. Say if I’m going to be teaching Free Software use, then should I be putting to one side my obvious and oblique “Ubuntu is easy” agenda and just go with what is already there?
Even if I know that other people are using events to promote other focuses of interest. If I think the event is worthwhile in it’s own right then I think I ort to be involved and help out where I can.
I know I’ve looked more like an Ubuntu only fan but personally it’s much more about getting the best and quickest Free Desktop in front of as many people as possible, whatever that turns out to be. Making sure that users have tools that work and are respectful of their rights as users under the Free Software definition. That is perhaps my agenda, perhaps trying to spread principles is part of it too?
So long as it’s an event to promote Free and Open Source, I can’t see a reason why I shouldn’t be involved if needed. Weather it’s Debian, Fedora or Firefox.
Thoughts?
Tags: agendas, Politics, principles, Ubuntu
Where is the greatest potential Return On Investment (ROI) for your time? By ‘return’, I mean the outcome that you are striving for.
If your desired outcome is to promote (market) FLOSS regardless of the container it comes in, my advice is to choose your container carefully. Some containers aren’t so friendly to mass adoption and will consume inordinate amounts of time for little or no net gain.
How’s that?
Cheers,
Randall.
Debian is fantastic. Ubuntu-compatible platform that runs on everything under the sun. I wouldn’t recommend it for desktop users, but there’s more to computing than the desktop.
I regard Fedora the way I regard OS X, however. Similar, quality operating system, passionate community, many of the same software components, from bash to Xorg to OpenGL.. but different priorities, and ultimately, a nearly direct competitor.
Fragmentation is the excuse I hear most for not writing applications for desktop linux. I want apps– I want Steam, I want Photoshop, I want AutoCad. So it’s in my interests, it seems, to decrease fragmentation. —but that’s just me. You’re free to involve yourself in whatever you feel furthers your interests regardless of what anyone says.
To be clear, I think RedHat and Novell have done absolutely fantastic things for Free Software. And I think their business models are just fine.
http://www.silicon.com/technology/software/2003/11/04/red-hat-ceo-says-you-should-buy-windows-39116741/
I’d just prefer them to stick to what they know.
United we stand, divided we fall.
I see it as either all of the distros are working against each other, or are working for a relatively common goal. The problem enters when the details are picked apart between them (e.g., BSD v. GNU).
> So long as it’s an event to promote Free and Open Source, I can’t see a reason why I shouldn’t be involved if needed. Weather it’s Debian, Fedora or Firefox.
That’s my point of view.
I’m a Fedora contributor (yay, intruder!
in France, and I’m friend with the Ubuntu-Fr people. Last November, they held their Lucid release party, and there I was helping them, welcoming visitors, promoting Ubuntu and holding the Ubuntu swag shop.
Sure I did it with a Fedora tshirt on, but that was more of a joke that actually helped people come towards me and open the conversation, so I could talk about Ubuntu (and sometimes about Fedora when people were insisting on it, but I tried hard not to serve my own agenda and just give a hand instead).
I think the key is to actually know the project and its goals, and speak about the facts with as less passion and personal engagement as possible.
@ethana2 Considering the recent GNOME contribution survey I would say it’s pretty unfair to say that Red Hat should “stick to what they know” – presumably to say Red Hat doesn’t know about putting together a desktop – when so much of GNOME is built by Red Hat….