From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 1 13:18:59 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A344A0DB for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA04168 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:16:45 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:16:45 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Please read Message-ID: <20000901131645.A4163@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/1 ILUG reps, Please make sure that you're speaking for your ILUG and not yourself when you make your statements here. For important decisions, if you feel the need to, ask for opinions on your ILUG mailing lists. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 1 23:48:22 2000 Received: from rmx306-mta.mail.com (rmx306-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.168]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848464A0FF for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web301-mc.mail.com (web301-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.162]) by rmx306-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA01073 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 02:41:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <383396312.967876911445.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 02:41:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 203.197.178.135 X-Archive-Number: 200009/2 --- Arun Sharma wrote: > Please make sure that you're speaking for your ILUG and not yourself > when you make your statements here. Hi, I have not been saying much for just this reason. The rough consensus of my lug is that: 1. Some kind of legal existence of LI is required for practical reasons. The reasons being: * So that we can *legally* meet once a month. As I understand it, I open myself to prosecution when I take money from people to pay for snacks, projectors, et al. * So that corporates can help us out during these meets and for expos. * So that freebies that have been offered can be passed on to members. 2. There should not be more formality than is required to fulfill these ends. I fail to see how this can be termed hi-jacking for commercial ends. I also fail to see what is wrong with making money off linux. Whenever the words 'commercial' or 'money' is mentioned on this list it is in a context as if it were 'paedophile' or 'fascist'. Linus makes money off Linux. RMS makes (made?) money off EMACS. Ditto Miguel De Igaza, ESR and others. Closer to home, Arun Sharma worked on Linux at Intel. The GPL allows for making profits (indirectly) off free software. Companies that use M$ technologies get some benefit from the M$ publicity bandwagon. Companies that use OSS have every right to expect similar support from the OSS community. There is no gain in analysing people's motives. We can only judge from their actions. So if anybody comes up with an idea let us judge it using the baseline "Does this ultimately benefit Linux in India?". Finally, let me address the "insignificance" of IT.COM. In IT.COM LI would have had national exposure with support from an organisation that is a force in IT in India. By declining to participate due to internal organisational problems we have demonstrated to the IT community that Linux in India is composed solely of amateurs who cannot be trusted to honor their commitments. Whether or not this is true, this does not bode well for the long term future of Linux in India. I am sure that I will now get flamed by those who somehow see purity in penury. If that is the price of speaking one's mind, so be it. Just for the record, I work in an all-Wintel shop and derive no financial benefit from Linux. regards, Biju ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 00:01:15 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7B34A039 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 00:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA05785 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:59:03 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:59:03 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Message-ID: <20000901235903.A5774@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <383396312.967876911445.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <383396312.967876911445.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com>; from botsie@mail.com on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 02:41:51AM -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/3 On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 02:41:51AM -0400, Biju Chacko wrote: > By declining to participate due to internal organisational > problems we have demonstrated to the IT community that Linux in India is > composed solely of amateurs who cannot be trusted to honor their > commitments. Whether or not this is true, this does not bode well for the > long term future of Linux in India. 1. Who made commitments about participating in IT.COM ? 2. I don't think anyone here is declining to participate in IT.COM. People who know each other from LI and identify with it, can still go in as an informal group. We may not have a *legal* presence. I don't know if that is a requirement - because there was a LI stall last year, without LI being a legal entity. That said, if we can finish this discussion and take it to it's logical conclusion well before IT.COM (Nov 1 ?), that'll be great. But let's not lose sight of our original goal (LI constitution, charter etc) and get side tracked by IT.COM. Since I'm a non voting member here, I'll let the other ILUG reps, speak for their respective ILUGs. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 02:40:06 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FDA4A03E for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 486 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 15:01:32 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13V9l6-0000PI-00 for ; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 15:08:44 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 15:08:44 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read In-Reply-To: <383396312.967876911445.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> References: <383396312.967876911445.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14768.50327.359054.883368@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/4 hi, >>>>> "Biju" == Biju Chacko writes: Biju> 1. Some kind of legal existence of LI is required for Biju> practical reasons. The reasons being: Biju> * So that we can *legally* meet once a month. As I Biju> understand it, I open myself to prosecution when I take Biju> money from people to pay for snacks, projectors, et al. Duh? Why do LUG's have to "legally" meet? Why does opening a canteen at a meet have to open you up for prosecution? And please I am asking these because I dont understand the issues that you face. I am not against anything. Biju> * So that corporates can help us out during these meets and Biju> for expos. Biju> * So that freebies that have been offered can be passed on Biju> to members. Sure. Biju> 2. There should not be more formality than is required to Biju> fulfill these ends. Absolutely. There is one thing to be noted here: different LUG's obviously require different degrees of formality. For instance: AFAIK, the ILUGB is very different from ILUGC. You have a larger population of corporates who attend. We dont. We are more like a loosely organised, informal group. Our meetings reflect this and similarly will yours. I am sure you see my point. It is evident that the LUG's need to be given some kind of "autonomy" on how they wish to conduct their meetings. So this formality can be a part of the particular LUG's charter? It is unfair to expect all LUG's to be similar. Biju> I fail to see how this can be termed hi-jacking for Biju> commercial ends. Neither do I. :) I think the problem is one of communication. Some of us simply havent been to any of ILUGB meetings. We do not understand the scale, magnitude of the things you do. This again reinstates the importance of a core group of communicating local LUG members. Biju> I also fail to see what is wrong with making money Biju> off linux. Whenever the words 'commercial' or 'money' is Biju> mentioned on this list it is in a context as if it were Biju> 'paedophile' or 'fascist'. Please dont make serious accusations like this. :) There was one post by Raghavendra Bhat in this vein, but we all know his views on the subject. Certainly, not everyone subscribes to his views. And please, I dont mean that Raghavendra Bhat is wrong or right. To each his/her views. Biju> Linus makes money off Linux. RMS makes (made?) money off Biju> EMACS. Ditto Miguel De Igaza, ESR and others. Closer to Biju> home, Arun Sharma worked on Linux at Intel. Biju> The GPL allows for making profits (indirectly) off free Biju> software. Companies that use M$ technologies get some Biju> benefit from the M$ publicity bandwagon. Companies that use Biju> OSS have every right to expect similar support from the OSS Biju> community. Sure, I agree. People need to make money. But remember there are people who are of the view that linux has to remain a hobby OS. I am not one of them. But we need to respect other views too. Similarly they must see our point. Even debian needs money, SPI manages their assets, people donate money and all of us have the greatest respect for the debian folks. Maybe we need to understand how debian works? Biju> There is no gain in analysing people's motives. We can only Biju> judge from their actions. So if anybody comes up with an Biju> idea let us judge it using the baseline "Does this Biju> ultimately benefit Linux in India?". Yes, and we need to define "benefit" too. :) Biju> Finally, let me address the "insignificance" of IT.COM. In Biju> IT.COM LI would have had national exposure with support from Biju> an organisation that is a force in IT in India. By declining Biju> to participate due to internal organisational problems we Biju> have demonstrated to the IT community that Linux in India is Biju> composed solely of amateurs who cannot be trusted to honor Biju> their commitments. Whether or not this is true, this does Biju> not bode well for the long term future of Linux in India. Gosh! Who ever said dont participate in IT.com? If you are referring to my posts, please reread them carefully. All I said was that we should not hurry this formalisation thing before IT.com. I did split too many hairs but I apologized for that later. Biju> I am sure that I will now get flamed by those who somehow Biju> see purity in penury. If that is the price of speaking one's Biju> mind, so be it. Sometimes you dont say anything wrong and are flamed. :) Life! :) regards, prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 03:22:35 2000 Received: from rmx325-mta.mail.com (rmx325-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.53]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E3A4A0BC for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 03:22:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web301-mc.mail.com (web301-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.162]) by rmx325-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA24449 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 06:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 06:20:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 203.197.182.36 X-Archive-Number: 200009/5 --- Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: >Duh? Why do LUG's have to "legally" meet? Why does opening a > canteen at a meet have to open you up for prosecution? > >And please I am asking these because I dont understand the > issues that you face. I am not against anything. > It's simple. We face a lot of incidental costs during a meet that are I have to bear as co-ordinator. If I collect say Rs50 from just the active members once a year thats about Rs5000. If everybody contributes it's Rs15,000. I can't keep that in a sock under my bed. I sure can't keep it in *my* bank account. Tax issues. To open a LUG Bank account, etc, etc. > I am sure you see my point. It is evident that the LUG's need > to be given some kind of "autonomy" on how they wish to > conduct their meetings. So this formality can be a part of > the particular LUG's charter? It is unfair to expect all > LUG's to be similar. You are absolutely right. We need to expand on this concept. > Neither do I. :) I think the problem is one of communication. > Some of us simply havent been to any of ILUGB meetings. We do > not understand the scale, magnitude of the things you do. > This again reinstates the importance of a core group of > communicating local LUG members. There is some talk of doing a mini-expo on Multimedia on Linux as our next meet. Just think of the arrangements for that. >Please dont make serious accusations like this. :) There was > one post by Raghavendra Bhat in this vein, but we all know his > views on the subject. Certainly, not everyone subscribes to > his views. And please, I dont mean that Raghavendra Bhat is > wrong or right. To each his/her views. I may have gone off the deep end. See below. > Sure, I agree. People need to make money. But remember there > are people who are of the view that linux has to remain a > hobby OS. I am not one of them. But we need to respect other > views too. Similarly they must see our point. > > Even debian needs money, SPI manages their assets, people > donate money and all of us have the greatest respect for the > debian folks. Maybe we need to understand how debian works? I agree. > > Biju> There is no gain in analysing people's motives. We can only > Biju> judge from their actions. So if anybody comes up with an > Biju> idea let us judge it using the baseline "Does this > Biju> ultimately benefit Linux in India?". > > Yes, and we need to define "benefit" too. :) his head: Maye I'm doing too many math cources! ;> :) > > Biju> Finally, let me address the "insignificance" of IT.COM. In > Biju> IT.COM LI would have had national exposure with support from > Biju> an organisation that is a force in IT in India. By declining > Biju> to participate due to internal organisational problems we > Biju> have demonstrated to the IT community that Linux in India is > Biju> composed solely of amateurs who cannot be trusted to honor > Biju> their commitments. Whether or not this is true, this does > Biju> not bode well for the long term future of Linux in India. > >Gosh! Who ever said dont participate in IT.com? If you are > referring to my posts, please reread them carefully. All I > said was that we should not hurry this formalisation thing > before IT.com. I did split too many hairs but I apologized > for that later. Arun has written to PCQ (our sponsors) informing them that this list has decided that LI will not be participating in IT.COM. PCQ is not willing to sponsor a regional organisation. That is the highlight of my LUG's year. We've been discussing it since the last IT.COM. My LUGers are naturally unhappy. *I'm* really upset. Naturally, I'm inclined to be less than polite. My apologies if I offended anybody. > > Biju> I am sure that I will now get flamed by those who somehow > Biju> see purity in penury. If that is the price of speaking one's > Biju> mind, so be it. > > Sometimes you dont say anything wrong and are flamed. :) Life! Sux! > --------------------------------------- > Please respect the privacy of this list. Why? Biju ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 03:47:34 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4623C4A036 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 03:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 395 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 16:09:28 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VAok-0000Tf-00 for ; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 16:16:34 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 16:16:34 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read In-Reply-To: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> References: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14768.55792.704667.105067@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/6 hi, >>>>> "Biju" == Biju Chacko writes: Biju> Arun has written to PCQ (our sponsors) informing them that Biju> this list has decided that LI will not be participating in Biju> IT.COM. PCQ is not willing to sponsor a regional Biju> organisation. That is the highlight of my LUG's year. We've Biju> been discussing it since the last IT.COM. My LUGers are Biju> naturally unhappy. *I'm* really upset. Naturally, I'm Biju> inclined to be less than polite. My apologies if I offended Biju> anybody. This is *bad*. Real *bad*. Arun - comments? I think we should make an exception and say ILUGB represents LI for this once. PCQ _should_ understand. It would be crazy if there was a linux presence last year that made big waves (yeah I heard about it) and _none_ this year. Just think what that means. prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 03:56:40 2000 Received: from rmx325-mta.mail.com (rmx325-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.53]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302644A036 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 03:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web431-mc.mail.com (web431-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.155]) by rmx325-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA07067 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 06:54:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <381733858.967892062111.JavaMail.root@web431-mc.mail.com> Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 06:54:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 203.197.182.36 X-Archive-Number: 200009/7 --- Arun Sharma wrote: > > People who know each other from LI and identify with it, can still > go in as an informal group. We may not have a *legal* presence. I > don't know if that is a requirement - because there was a LI stall > last year, without LI being a legal entity. Arun, I am surprised by your reply. Since you are well aware of the circumstances, I cannot imagine how you could write this. If I were of a suspicious nature I would conclude that this was a blatant attempt to mislead this list. However, I am sure I have misunderstood you. For those of you who do not have the background: 1. PCQ offered to sponsor LI at IT.COM. Their only condition was that LI be a legal entity because they got into trouble with their auditors last year. 2. The deadline for PCQ to confirm with IT.COM organisers has come up. 3. We do not have any legal (even a figurehead) entity in place. 4. Arun informed PCQ that this list's "consensus" was that LI would not be ready in time. 5. PCQ is not willing to sponsor any regional organisations. 6. B-LUG's entire activities (all designed in terms of preperation for this expo) for the year have been rendered meaningless. Biju ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 09:03:57 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0EF49FF0 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:03:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA06473 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:01:43 -0700 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:01:43 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Message-ID: <20000902090143.A6416@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com>; from botsie@mail.com on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 06:20:33AM -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/8 --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 06:20:33AM -0400, Biju Chacko wrote: Biju, > Arun has written to PCQ (our sponsors) informing them that this list has > decided that LI will not be participating in IT.COM. Who told you this ? I wish you had read my response to PCQ. I'm attaching it to this mail for your review. Please let me know if you think this is an unfair characterization of the traffic on this list. I'm also attaching your mail on the issue and my reading of your mail is that you agree with my statement made to KK. Let me know if this is not the case. In any case, if you felt that you needed to make the discussion on this list public, it'd have been polite to inform the list that you wish to make the discussion public and perhaps people would've agreed. Could we put this IT.COM issue aside and move on ? -Arun --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from www.aunet.org (aunet.org [216.103.113.202]) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA13506 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:10:28 -0700 Received: from www.aunet.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49EAC4A01E; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rmx308-mta.mail.com (rmx308-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.43]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F08B24A01E for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web304-mc.mail.com (web304-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.165]) by rmx308-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA19928 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:15:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <385072317.967130154348.JavaMail.root@web304-mc.mail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:15:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: [LI-Reg] The next step Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 203.197.178.220 Precedence: bulk Sender: li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Reply-To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org --- Raghavendra Bhat wrote: > What has IT.com to do anything about this discussion of > GNU/Linux in India ? Anyway, we are not going to keep > IT.com in mind when we discuss things Linux......... > no deadlines like this one !! You are right. IT.com is a Bangalore-specific issue. I am not demanding a deadline. I am merely suggesting that, as with any other task with a specific objective, we ought have a calendar by which we can judge the progress. My gut-feeling is that an open-ended discussion will remain just that - a discussion. > We should only accept reasonable deadlines if not none. > GNU/Linux has evolved with no deadlines kept in sight. Well, it is merely a suggestion. If you feel that some kind of target is not reasonable, by all means, let us not have them. Biju ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup --------------------------------------- Please respect the privacy of this list. --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+ Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 08:44:51 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: Krishna Kumar Cc: Atul Chitnis , "K.Dakshinamurthy" , Sudhakar Chandrasekharan , Gopi Garge Subject: Re: IT.COM Message-ID: <20000901084451.A3422@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <4.3.0.20000901150657.00c8dd90@mail.cmil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20000901150657.00c8dd90@mail.cmil.com>; from kkkg@cmil.com on Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:18:21PM +0530 On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:18:21PM +0530, Krishna Kumar wrote: KK: > Atul, > > While it is great to know that the Bangalore LUG is doing so well, > I have explained to you that PCQ cannot sponsor a single LUG, for > reasons shown below. The sponsorship has to go to a national body, > not a regional one. We're aware of these issues. We have formed a semi-closed mailing list, with representation from almost all the ILUGs and a time bound discussion is currently taking place to figure out the constituion, mode of functioning etc. We may not be done before IT.COM happens. The general consensus has been to stick to the published timetable rather than hurry things up for the sake of IT.COM. I hope you realize the complexities involved in evolving a consensus. Thank you for your patience! -Arun --8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+-- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 09:11:23 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CD914A126 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:11:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA06530 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:09:11 -0700 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:09:11 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Message-ID: <20000902090911.B6416@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> <14768.55792.704667.105067@monster.linux.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <14768.55792.704667.105067@monster.linux.in>; from prabhu@aero.iitm.ernet.in on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:16:34PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/9 On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:16:34PM +0530, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > This is *bad*. Real *bad*. Arun - comments? Why is it bad ? I just relayed your comments to PCQ - that we're not hurrying things up for the sake of IT.COM. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 09:29:26 2000 Received: from giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (giasmd01.vsnl.net.in [202.54.6.1]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D825E4A167 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 09:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vsnl.com ([61.1.242.191]) by giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA23576 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:04:58 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <39B12A63.B301FE91@vsnl.com> Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 21:57:15 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat Organization: Power of the GNU http://www.gnu.org/ X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test8 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read References: <381733858.967892062111.JavaMail.root@web431-mc.mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/10 Biju Chacko wrote: > 4. Arun informed PCQ that this list's "consensus" was that LI would not be > ready in time. > So U mean to say that PCQ was informed earlier by someone one that LI would be ready and in time ? I have one single request that we need not give much too importance to IT.com and PCQ than is required. Shall we tee off from this interruption ? No offense intended. -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 10:15:48 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07484A0E6 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA06761 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:13:31 -0700 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:13:31 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: ideas behind constitutions in the western world Message-ID: <20000902101331.A6741@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/11 Makes a good reading. http://www.islandnet.com/~arton/constitution.html Proposal: Key issues we need to figure out: - Administrative posts - Functional definition of each post - Balance of power - who vetos who and who has the final say on what - The mode of election - Voting on issues - Amendments to the constitution I think the fundamental issue is to make sure that the balance of power is such that one can't make arbitrary amendments to the constitution and behave in a dictatorial way. Feel free to add/delete from the list or make alternate proposals. Once we've done that, may be we can start discussing each one of the items in more detail ? -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 10:39:33 2000 Received: from giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (giasmd01.vsnl.net.in [202.54.6.1]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE964A13A for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:39:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut ([61.1.238.66]) by giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA04916 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 23:15:06 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VHEO-0000ck-00; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 23:07:28 +0530 Received: from ragu by debianut with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VHEK-0000ci-00 for ; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 23:07:24 +0530 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 23:07:24 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: ideas behind constitutions in the western world Message-ID: <20000902230724.A2304@debianut.ekmnet.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: The GNU (http://www.gnu.org/) X-Archive-Number: 200009/12 On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 10:13:31AM -0700, Arun Sharma wrote: > Makes a good reading. > A good read. Tnx for the link. But is it relevant here ? It can be a good guide or rather template. > - Balance of power - who vetos who and who has the final say on what > The most trickiest issue. When the discussions come in thick and fast, the Kochi (Cochin) LUG's voice would be the loudest on this issue among others. -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 10:49:47 2000 Received: from giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (giasmd01.vsnl.net.in [202.54.6.1]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26CE4A036 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut ([61.1.238.66]) by giasmd01.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA24781 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 23:25:20 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VHOI-0000eK-00; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 23:17:42 +0530 Received: from ragu by debianut with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VHO0-0000eI-00 for ; Sat, 02 Sep 2000 23:17:24 +0530 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 23:17:24 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Cease and Desist. Message-ID: <20000902231724.A2432@debianut.ekmnet.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: The GNU (http://www.gnu.org/) X-Archive-Number: 200009/13 Hello: Please note that it is not fair to send this list messages to third persons or rather members of the public. After the discussions are over and the votes are cast, these messages can be put up on our archives with no moderation/snipping off. The privacy of this list should not be compromised !! -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 11:23:54 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AAF4A139 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 11:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp116-72.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.116.72]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id AAA01625 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 00:30:09 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <009001c0150b$4c3c07c0$4874c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: Subject: why register Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 23:56:18 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Archive-Number: 200009/14 Hi all, Speaking for my LUG, I side with Biju.... money matters *do* matter.... on 3rd September, last year we organised Linux-Interact. It was a fair success with people turning up from at least 7 different districts of west bengal. 1. Coming to the hurdles we faced, we had recieved sponsership pledges from certain corporate entity that we would be reimbursed in cash on presenting the bills. We spent "x" amount of money from our (mostly ILUG-Cal core-group members) own pockets, we are yet to be reimbursed after one year. REASON -- The COO of the company (Indian subsidiary of an US-based Foo.Inc.) is no longer with the company and the pledge/clearance was a verbal one. The question right now is -- Q: "Of-course we will pay, but *to whom*??? A: Indranil Das Gupta, Co-ordinator, ILUG-Cal. Q. How/What is ILUG-Cal? A: ???? 2. We also got assurances from certain well-known h/w vendor for sponsership of equipment for the demos (2 server class m/cs and 6 nodes). These were to be handed over to us 2 days before the event. The vendor had a change of heart because our organisation was none like he had known or ever sponsered. The machines never showed up.... Somehow, we managed to put together 3 PCs (home systems belonging to our members), one IBM laptop and networked using equipment stripped out of my home network. Even though the event was successful, we couldn't do all we wanted to do when we started the planning. One particular IT company from the Calcutta STP wanted to sponser up to Rs. 15,000, but only in cheque, which we couldn't accept. REASON -- We didn't have a bank account, because we weren't a legal entity of any nature. 3. The Computer Bookshop (the O'Reilly distributors in India) franchisee in Calcutta "Millienium" participated in Linux-Interact by putting up a stall, the space was provided to them free of any charge, but they had to make their display/stall arrangements. They did a brisk business during the course of the event. The bookshop owner announced that they will provide special discount rates for ILUG-Cal members. Till date, no member has been able to avail of the offer. REASON -- We don't have a membership register and therefore photo-identity cards (which the bookshop requires) can't be issued. 4. Besides regular/annual auditing of whatever funds in the hands of the LUG needs to be done, otherwise you can expect that sometime down the line there will be whispers about what is happening/being done with the voluntary contributions made by the members. This had happened once in our case. Interestingly the issue was raised by someone who had never come forward to contribute anything. FYI, the persons with questions about "transparency" wrt funds with the LUG were pointed to our list archives where complete details had been posted, and these questioning voices died away, but not before enuf b/w had been wasted by a needless flamefest. 5. We wanted to participate in a large annual IT-fair, the stall charges could have been waived/sponsered.... but we needed to show ourselves as a recognisable legal entity to avail either options, which we were not. I would also like to know what is the status of contributions/donations made to non-profit organisation? are these contribution if made by any person exempt from taxation in anyway? Just my 2p on behalf of my LUG. --indra. DISCLAIMER.... About myself....I do have commercial interest in the success of Linux/Opensource-based technologies among commercial users of IT products and services, and I am trying to build my own small pile ;-) From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 2 13:44:36 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01AA74A167 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 13:44:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA07146 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 13:42:19 -0700 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 13:42:19 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: why register Message-ID: <20000902134219.A7005@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <009001c0150b$4c3c07c0$4874c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <009001c0150b$4c3c07c0$4874c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in>; from indradg@cal.vsnl.net.in on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 11:56:18PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/15 On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 11:56:18PM +0530, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: > I would also like to know what is the status of contributions/donations > made to non-profit organisation? are these contribution if made by > any person exempt from taxation in anyway? In the US, you have to be a registered under a specific tax category 501(c). There must be a similar tax law in India. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 00:05:33 2000 Received: from rmx195-mta.mail.com (rmx195-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.42]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D1A4A01F for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 00:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web303-mc.mail.com (web303-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.164]) by rmx195-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA00203; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 03:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <382609102.967964606039.JavaMail.root@web303-mc.mail.com> Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 03:03:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Some queries to *all* list members Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 202.54.89.83 X-Archive-Number: 200009/16 All, I have a few queries to all the members of this list. 1.Do we need this secrecy? ----------------------------------------------------- I see no gain in keeping the archives of this list closed. Sure, only a few people are posting, for the sake of sanity. But is so confidential about the content that we have to keep it secret fro other members of the linux community. The only benefit is that some people can make assertions about the decisions of this list without having to substantiate them. 2. Did this list decide to spend two months talking? ---------------------------------------------------------------- When did this list decide that it needed two months to come up with an LI organisation? I remember no vote, no consensus. The last I heard we were still discussing it -- some favoured deadlines others did not. Even without deadlines we were going by Thath's four week schedule. Somehow, Arun mistakenly thought we decided we needed so much time that we ought to throw away a Rs10 lakh, no strings attached [1] sponsorship from PCQ. All they wanted was an assurance that a legal entity existed by IT.COM. We could not manage that? We need so much time? How complicated will LI be? Which brings up the next query 3. How many people want a big, complicated LI ? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What do I know about Calcutta's problems? What does Chennai know about Indore? What is the use of a complicated all-india organisation? The LUGs *must* be completely autonomous. All we need is a single, legal, point of contact for LUGs in India. It's constitution would be simple: the co-ordinators decide which one of themselves gets to receive LI's mail. I would like to see replies from *everybody* on this list. The discussions seem to be dominated by three of four people. What about Bombay? Trivandrum? Delhi? Indore? I get the feeling that the rest find this process so distastful that they are abstaining. I would like to know what *everybody* feels about each point. regards, Biju [1] I'm sure PCQ stands to gain from the growth of Linux in India. But don't we all? When our interests co-incide we *should* co-operate. ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 00:36:19 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D7249F1E for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 00:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 413 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 12:58:15 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VUJK-0000Lp-00 for ; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:05:26 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:05:26 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read In-Reply-To: <20000902090911.B6416@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <383163569.967890034299.JavaMail.root@web301-mc.mail.com> <14768.55792.704667.105067@monster.linux.in> <20000902090911.B6416@sharmas.dhs.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14769.64235.265819.621955@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/17 hi, >>>>> "Arun" == Arun Sharma writes: Arun> On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:16:34PM +0530, Prabhu Arun> Ramachandran wrote: >> This is *bad*. Real *bad*. Arun - comments? Arun> Why is it bad ? I just relayed your comments to PCQ - that Arun> we're not hurrying things up for the sake of IT.COM. Fair enough. I have the foll. things to say: 0) Biju, you should have mentioned this problem immediately when the IT.com thing came up. The current situation changes _everything_. I am sure most of us had no idea of what was going on. 1) Last year we had a "linux presence" at IT.com. I believe that they even had a penguin parade and stuff like that. If we are concerned about linux in India we need to have as good if not better presence this year. Don't you agree? Now, as per Biju's mail there are two specific problems a) PCQ or any other organisation would find it hard to provide large amounts of funding if there are audit problems. b) If there is no funding no LUG can have a stall at IT.com. 2) My original post against hurrying things up for IT.com was made under the impression that ILUGB was anyway going to have a stall independant of the current decision. Indeed, none of the other posters indicated that there was a serious problem. 3) I have no idea why this whole thing has been put off untill the last minute. Why wasnt this whole deal brought up earlier? Did PCQ tell you of the problems late?? 4) Under the current circumstances we have the foll. choices. a) Forget IT.com. This may not turn out to be too bad since there certainly will be commercial linux concerns. Therefore there will be a "linux presence" of some kind. There will be no representatives of LI though. b) The various LUG's can somehow pool money (I can ask Lateral software and OS4 at ilugc for support) and get a small stall for LI (i.e. ILUGB). I think we should be able to collect small amounts without many problems. There are quite a few commercial linux concerns at B'lore too. For instance at the PCQ expo at Chennai, Lateral generously sponsered a nice stall for ilugc next to theirs. Similarly, OS4 completely funded the Linux demo day here. c) Somehow hurry up the LI formalization issue. I guess the answer to this is a big no. So it leaves us with the above two choices. Or do none of you folks care about this at all? Please communicate. Enough damage has been caused by lack of it so far. prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 00:56:20 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9AED4A13A for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 00:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 467 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:18:28 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VUct-0000ME-00 for ; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:25:39 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:25:39 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: why register In-Reply-To: <20000902134219.A7005@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <009001c0150b$4c3c07c0$4874c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> <20000902134219.A7005@sharmas.dhs.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14770.944.535644.426636@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/18 hi, >>>>> "Arun" == Arun Sharma writes: Arun> On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 11:56:18PM +0530, Indranil Das Gupta Arun> wrote: >> I would also like to know what is the status of >> contributions/donations made to non-profit organisation? are >> these contribution if made by any person exempt from taxation >> in anyway? Arun> In the US, you have to be a registered under a specific tax Arun> category 501(c). There must be a similar tax law in India. Yes, there is one. I dont know the exact thing but I think you need the 80G excemption thing, this does require a formal organisation. prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 00:59:31 2000 Received: from rmx308-mta.mail.com (rmx308-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.43]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC61D4A168 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 00:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web307-mc.mail.com (web307-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.153]) by rmx308-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA03127 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 03:57:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <383122985.967967844438.JavaMail.root@web307-mc.mail.com> Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 03:57:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 202.54.89.83 X-Archive-Number: 200009/19 --- Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > 0) Biju, you should have mentioned this problem immediately when the > IT.com thing came up. The current situation changes _everything_. I > am sure most of us had no idea of what was going on. *I* had very little idea of the scale of the problem until Saturday. However, Arun, Thaths and KD as well as various others have been aware of this since *November* last year (last IT.COM). > 3) I have no idea why this whole thing has been put off untill the > last minute. Why wasnt this whole deal brought up earlier? Did PCQ > tell you of the problems late?? People have been formally asking for this process to be started since February. I am not sure why it has been delayed so long. > 4) Under the current circumstances we have the foll. choices. > > a) Forget IT.com. This may not turn out to be too bad since > there certainly will be commercial linux concerns. Therefore > there will be a "linux presence" of some kind. There will be > no representatives of LI though. > > b) The various LUG's can somehow pool money (I can ask Lateral > software and OS4 at ilugc for support) and get a small stall > for LI (i.e. ILUGB). I think we should be able to collect > small amounts without many problems. There are quite a few > commercial linux concerns at B'lore too. For instance at the > PCQ expo at Chennai, Lateral generously sponsered a nice stall > for ilugc next to theirs. Similarly, OS4 completely funded > the Linux demo day here. This is very kind but impractical for two reasons: 1. the amount of money: Rs 10 lakhs is what PCQ was prepared to foot. 2. The stalls are not available. PCQ booked this *last* year in the expectation that there would be a legal entity in one year's time. > > c) Somehow hurry up the LI formalization issue. I guess the > answer to this is a big no. So it leaves us with the above > two choices. Don't hurry it up. I never asked that it be hurried up. Just that it be completed in the advertised four weeks. And that assurance be conveyed to PCQ. > Or do none of you folks care about this at all? Please communicate. > Enough damage has been caused by lack of it so far. > > prabhu ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 06:15:53 2000 Received: from railmalem.caltiger.com (unknown [202.86.136.23]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB9A84A029 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 06:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut by railmalem.caltiger.com (8.9.3/1.1.4.2/07Aug00-0105PM) id SAA0000005322; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 18:42:43 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VZZk-0000va-00; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 18:42:44 +0530 Received: from ragu by debianut with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13VZZj-0000vY-00 for ; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 18:42:43 +0530 Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 18:42:43 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Message-ID: <20000903184243.A3461@debianut.ekmnet.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Organization: Power of the GNU (http://www.gnu.org/) X-Archive-Number: 200009/20 On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 03:57:24AM -0400, Biju Chacko wrote: > 2. The stalls are not available. PCQ booked this *last* year in the > expectation that there would be a legal entity in one year's time. > So the concerned people all the while knew this !! If so then there is no point is debating this Societification issue. I strongly believe that a decision has been taken long back, let us cast our votes and be done with it. Any way it will be seen through...even if some protest. > I never asked that it be hurried up. Just that it be completed in > the advertised four weeks. And that assurance be conveyed to PCQ. > One never asked but was hoping against hope that it would be formalized fast ?!? Maybe you are reminding that this issue should be concluded fast. Where was it advertised that this issue should be completed in 4 weeks ? What assurance ? To whom ? If at all LI is going to participate in IT.com, I request that we participate as a User Group representing the whole of India with a distinct stall. We need not be a FRONT organization for PCQ/Chip/XYZ to do their bidding and to boost their sales. We shall accept donations [see SPI] and stand on our legs but not do their act, even if they have graciously booked a stall for LI; in anticipation. We are not here to please PCQ/Chip/XYZ Linux Mag. We stand for the larger user base...that is the Indian GNU/Linux User. I see the debate going well past November First. I say, take the vote *now* ('coz Arun- Sharma earlier on implied that I wanted it fast) or after November second week. -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 08:51:42 2000 Received: from mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (mumbai1.mtnl.net.in [203.94.227.51]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5593E4A01B for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 08:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oldcomp by mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (8.9.1/1.1.20.3/27Mar00-0621PM) id VAA0000031405; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 21:19:09 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <002401c015be$c1c5a920$59ea5ecb@oldcomp> From: "G.Sagar" To: References: <382609102.967964606039.JavaMail.root@web303-mc.mail.com> Subject: Re: Some queries to *all* list members Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 21:20:44 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/21 me speaks on behalf of ILUG-Bom (for most part) .... ----- Original Message ----- From: Biju Chacko > 1.Do we need this secrecy? I dont think so. But I have consciously kept ILUG-Bom unupdated on the discussions of this list simply because i am still to see some worthwhile output of the several discussions going on right now on this list. > 2. Did this list decide to spend two months talking? I do not know what you are talking about here ! > 3. How many people want a big, complicated LI ? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > What do I know about Calcutta's problems? What does Chennai know about > Indore? What is the use of a complicated all-india organisation? Im lost here. What has registering LI as an org got to do with LUG's knowing each others problems ?? The LUGs > *must* be completely autonomous. The lug's *ARE* going to be autonomous. Again, I dont see what this has got to do with LI registration issue ! > I would like to see replies from *everybody* on this list. The discussions > seem to be dominated by three of four people. What about Bombay? Trivandrum? > Delhi? Indore? I get the feeling that the rest find this process so > distastful that they are abstaining. First, I, in no way, saw any conversation where i could actively contribute and enhance the quality of discussion. Hence I refrained. Second, I dont understand why you interpret this abstinance as "finding the process distasteful" !!! I have been following each and every thread here closely. I, personally, will speak only when im sure I have some quality inputs. > [1] I'm sure PCQ stands to gain from the growth of Linux in India. But don't > we all? When our interests co-incide we *should* co-operate. I would like to know if there has been some off-this-list discussion about IT.com, PCQ etc etc. I dont see why PCQ is being dragged into discussions !! Cheerio, Sagar. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 09:34:08 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1EC14A00B for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA09566 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:31:48 -0700 Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:31:48 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Could we get over this IT.COM thing ? Message-ID: <20000903093148.B9528@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <383122985.967967844438.JavaMail.root@web307-mc.mail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <383122985.967967844438.JavaMail.root@web307-mc.mail.com>; from botsie@mail.com on Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 03:57:24AM -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/22 On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 03:57:24AM -0400, Biju Chacko wrote: Biju, The reason why this list is private is because Thaths envisioned it to be similar to the Debian process. And my guess is that they kept it closed for a reason you pointed out earlier - endless politicking about each and every word said on the list. > *I* had very little idea of the scale of the problem until Saturday. > However, Arun, Thaths and KD as well as various others have been aware of > this since *November* last year (last IT.COM). I wish you wouldn't speak on this list about second hand accounts you hear from Atul. I've never been involved in "managing" (or mismanaging) the LI registration. I've neither been to IT.COM and nor have anything to do with it. Don't drag my name into it unnecessarily. My only fault has been to step up and reply to KK's mail. Gosh! I have to answer critics who accuse me of doing Atul's bidding on the list and people who accuse me of NOT doing pricesely that. For whatever reason, Atul doesn't believe that LI-REG is going anywhere and he doesn't believe in this process. You'll probably hear something more public from him about this. I don't feel very good about washing dirty laundry publicly - but looks like you're picking up too much news from Atul. So I felt the need to clarify. > People have been formally asking for this process to be started since > February. I am not sure why it has been delayed so long. Ask, KD. KD, could you speak up please ? > This is very kind but impractical for two reasons: > > 1. the amount of money: Rs 10 lakhs is what PCQ was prepared to foot. > I'm not very amused by this. If the amount was Rs 100, your reaction would've been very different ? > 2. The stalls are not available. PCQ booked this *last* year in the > expectation that there would be a legal entity in one year's time. I don't speak with PCQ. I was aware of the necessity, but I wasn't aware of any deadlines. > Don't hurry it up. I never asked that it be hurried up. Just that it be > completed in the advertised four weeks. And that assurance be conveyed to > PCQ. Which is exactly what I told KK and Atul. But Atul was in no mood to listen. He wanted it resolved "right now" and give him archives of the list, so that he can verify the facts for himself. I refused. Looks like you obliged ? I've had enough of IT.COM. This is my last post on that topic. The only thing I'm willing to discuss on this list is LI constitution, which we should be discussing at this time according to our time table. I'm still waiting for responses for the 5-6 proposals I put forth regarding what should the constitution address. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 09:39:00 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A63704A00B for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA09585 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:36:41 -0700 Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:36:41 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read Message-ID: <20000903093641.C9528@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20000903184243.A3461@debianut.ekmnet.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20000903184243.A3461@debianut.ekmnet.in>; from ragu@vsnl.com on Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 06:42:43PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/23 On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 06:42:43PM +0530, Raghavendra Bhat wrote: Rag00, > So the concerned people all the while knew this !! If so then there is > no point is debating this Societification issue. I strongly believe > that a decision has been taken long back, let us cast our votes > and be done with it. The main point of the list is not whether we should exist or not, but what is our mode of functioning. You're free to make constructive proposals to prevent some XYZ entity from controlling LI. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 10:44:32 2000 Received: from railmalem.caltiger.com (unknown [202.86.136.23]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD8A4A025 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut by railmalem.caltiger.com (8.9.3/1.1.4.2/07Aug00-0105PM) id XAA0000008740; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 23:11:15 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13VdlX-0000CM-00; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 23:11:11 +0530 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=vsnl.com) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13VdlX-0000CK-00 for ; Sun, 03 Sep 2000 23:11:11 +0530 Message-ID: <39B28D36.7CA9A0F0@vsnl.com> Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 23:11:10 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat Organization: Power of the GNU http://www.gnu.org/ X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test7 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read References: <20000903184243.A3461@debianut.ekmnet.in> <20000903093641.C9528@sharmas.dhs.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/24 Arun Sharma wrote: > You're free to make constructive proposals > to prevent some XYZ entity from controlling LI. > I will do that as and when it comes up. Already XYZ entities are seeming to control us !! -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 11:36:30 2000 Received: from smtp1b.mail.yahoo.com (smtp3.mail.yahoo.com [128.11.68.135]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 588014A00F for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO vaibhav) (61.1.16.255) by smtp3.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 2000 18:34:18 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <007301c015d5$a5ffdc80$ff10013d@vaibhav> From: "VaibhaV Sharma" To: References: <382609102.967964606039.JavaMail.root@web303-mc.mail.com> Subject: Re: Some queries to *all* list members Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 00:01:16 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/25 > 1.Do we need this secrecy? > ----------------------------------------------------- I think yes, till we come out with something meaningful or something regarding any major decision for LI. > I see no gain in keeping the archives of this list closed. Sure, only a few > people are posting, for the sake of sanity. But is so confidential about the > content that we have to keep it secret fro other members of the linux > community. The only benefit is that some people can make assertions about > the decisions of this list without having to substantiate them. > Its not because we are talking something confidential or top secret, its because the purpose of the list would not be solved if the list contents were public at all times. Otherwise the flaming capacity that we display on the list (remember LIH or LIG) wont allow us to reach on any decision. And as such in any case of voting, the concensus of the local LIG members can and should be taken by the representatives. > 2. Did this list decide to spend two months talking? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > When did this list decide that it needed two months to come up with an LI > organisation? I remember no vote, no consensus. The last I heard we were Did that IT.com issue allow us to decide anything worthwhile till now?? > 3. How many people want a big, complicated LI ? > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > What do I know about Calcutta's problems? What does Chennai know about > Indore? What is the use of a complicated all-india organisation? The LUGs > *must* be completely autonomous. All we need is a single, legal, point of > contact for LUGs in India. It's constitution would be simple: the > co-ordinators decide which one of themselves gets to receive LI's mail. > LUG's have been and would always be autonomous. If you talk of commercial issues, on the local level or on the national level, who would like to oblige this group if we do not show any sense of responsibility or collective effort?? For that we need to work on and finalise the "Constitution" we are here to discuss. And I dont think that would be a simple task with the kind of discussion talent we have in this country. > I would like to see replies from *everybody* on this list. The discussions > seem to be dominated by three of four people. What about Bombay? Trivandrum? > Delhi? Indore? I get the feeling that the rest find this process so > distastful that they are abstaining. Correct!! But....The process is not distastful, whats making it distasteful is the flames which have been going around in loops. And is there a need for everyone on this list to comment on every thread going on? > > [1] I'm sure PCQ stands to gain from the growth of Linux in India. But don't > we all? When our interests co-incide we *should* co-operate. Thats what we are here for, but would we be able to co-operate while some of our interests or should I say opinions, DON't co-incide?? And I dont understand why PCQ and IT.com are being dragged and are being stretched so long?? We surely have to be prepared for IT.com and at this moment what we need is a common concensus on the some constitution so that we are ready with the required formalities before we start loosing opportunities due to mutual differences. And this is just one specific event! We would need to face this legal entity thing in EVERY big event that we try to participate in. VaibhaV _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 3 12:28:47 2000 Received: from railmalem.caltiger.com (unknown [202.86.136.23]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870384A02E for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 12:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut by railmalem.caltiger.com (8.9.3/1.1.4.2/07Aug00-0105PM) id AAA0000027089; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 00:55:31 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13VfOH-0000I6-00; Mon, 04 Sep 2000 00:55:17 +0530 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=vsnl.com) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13VfOH-0000I4-00 for ; Mon, 04 Sep 2000 00:55:17 +0530 Message-ID: <39B2A52A.253DFBEF@vsnl.com> Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 00:53:22 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat Organization: Power of the GNU http://www.gnu.org/ X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test7 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Some queries to *all* list members References: <382609102.967964606039.JavaMail.root@web303-mc.mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/26 Biju Chacko wrote: > 1.Do we need this secrecy? > > The only benefit is that some people can make assertions about > the decisions of this list without having to substantiate them. > Yes, we need this in the limited way as put forth by Thaths. Thaths and Arun Sharma are dead right on this aspect. You can take your benefit of doubt to your list and discuss it out there and come here to substantiate it. > 2. Did this list decide to spend two months talking? > How complicated will LI be? > Talking we have to do. No way out. Very much complicated that the users' are going to control it. Some LUGs may not opt to join the parent LI body 'coz it is gross. What benefit does the regional LUG see in joining the LI parent ? Not for FREEBIES, like CDs and Tee Shirts of some XYZ company which has got its Directors on the ILUG mailing list or the ILUG bigwigs on its payroll. > 3. How many people want a big, complicated LI ? > > All we need is a single, legal, point of contact for LUGs in India. > the co-ordinators decide which one of themselves gets to receive > LI's mail. > Some want a big LI and some do not. We have to trash things out. We, as representatives of local LUGs are not interested in what U want. Decide that for urself. The co-ordinators have decided which one of themselves gets to receive LI's mail. It is you who have not got a clue of what you are upto. > I would like to see replies from *everybody* on this list. > I get the feeling that the rest find this process so distastful > that they are abstaining. > What if you do not see replies ? Distasteful of what..Can you please elaborate ? > [1] I'm sure PCQ stands to gain from the growth of Linux in India. > But don't we all? When our interests co-incide we *should* co-operate. > Why are you saying only PCQ ? There are others too and we should cooperate and co-ordinate with them too. We should co-operate with all for the users' benefit. If we are to co-operate only with PCQ, we stand to be alienated at a later point in time. This is not an issue of PCQ, IT.com or anything. We are here to decide about us..the LUGs around the country !! -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 09:29:05 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118A54A152 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA11714 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:26:42 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 09:26:42 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Could we have a quick vote ? Message-ID: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="opJtzjQTFsWo+cga" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/27 --opJtzjQTFsWo+cga Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline All, Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be sent to PCQ about IT.COM ? There shall be no more discussion on the topic. But a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the list within the next 24 hours. I will then collect all the "yes" votes and add the signatories to the letter and forward it to PCQ. Now on to our regularly scheduled program. -Arun --opJtzjQTFsWo+cga Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=pcq-letter Dear KK, It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an important event and it would be a shame to lose this opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade show. We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule to figure out the charter and the administrative details of Linux India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate the urgency of the matter. We also understand the difficulties you have in justifying the expenses incurred on a local LUG. Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore as the authorised organisation to handle all matters relating to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this year. Signed by: Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan K. Dakshinamurthy Gurunandan Bhat --opJtzjQTFsWo+cga-- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 10:01:31 2000 Received: from mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (mumbai1.mtnl.net.in [203.94.227.51]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487354A0B6 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oldcomp by mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (8.9.1/1.1.20.3/27Mar00-0621PM) id WAA0000001933; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:29:17 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <004d01c01691$ba6abc00$b8ea5ecb@oldcomp> From: "G.Sagar" To: References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:31:06 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/28 yes. cheerio, Sagar. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 11:08:53 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96754A1CE for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 11:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp116-92.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.116.92]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id AAA10790 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:15:01 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <00cb01c0169b$826d0a60$5c74c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> <004d01c01691$ba6abc00$b8ea5ecb@oldcomp> Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:41:11 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Archive-Number: 200009/29 ----- Original Message ----- From: G.Sagar To: Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 10:31 PM Subject: Re: [LI-Reg] Could we have a quick vote ? > yes. I second that! --indra From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 11:32:32 2000 Received: from smtp1.mail.yahoo.com (smtp1.mail.yahoo.com [128.11.68.130]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B7A14A1F0 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 11:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO vaibhav) (61.1.18.69) by smtp1.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Sep 2000 18:30:14 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <003401c0169e$3e9a0920$4512013d@vaibhav> From: "VaibhaV Sharma" To: References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:00:34 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/30 yes!! VaibhaV ILUG-Indore ----- Original Message ----- From: Arun Sharma To: Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:56 PM Subject: [LI-Reg] Could we have a quick vote ? > All, > > Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be sent to PCQ > about IT.COM ? There shall be no more discussion on the topic. But > a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the list within the next > 24 hours. > > I will then collect all the "yes" votes and add the signatories to > the letter and forward it to PCQ. > > Now on to our regularly scheduled program. > > -Arun > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > --------------------------------------- > Please respect the privacy of this list. > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 12:21:12 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [61.11.13.73]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB454A1A3 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 12:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02526 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:46:56 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:46:55 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/31 On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Arun Sharma wrote: > Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be sent to PCQ > about IT.COM ? Yes. Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 18:14:28 2000 Received: from railmalem.caltiger.com (unknown [202.86.136.23]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F20BB4A0FC for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 18:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut by railmalem.caltiger.com (8.9.3/1.1.4.2/07Aug00-0105PM) id GAA0000008577; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 06:41:50 +0530 (IST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=debianut) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13W7Hc-0000CZ-00; Tue, 05 Sep 2000 06:42:16 +0530 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=vsnl.com) by debianut with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13W7Hb-0000CX-00 for ; Tue, 05 Sep 2000 06:42:15 +0530 Message-ID: <39B44857.B014962C@vsnl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 06:41:51 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat Organization: Power of the GNU http://www.gnu.org/ X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test8 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/32 Arun Sharma wrote: > a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the list within the next > 24 hours. > NO. -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 21:24:23 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.227]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9A8B4A0A7 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00896 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:51:29 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:51:29 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Constitution In-Reply-To: <39B44857.B014962C@vsnl.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/33 All, I suggest the following for your consideration: It would be nice if one of us provides a working draft (or sections of a draft) for discussion? It makes it easier to focus. I suggest the constitution record the following: a) Aims of LI b) How and whom by, will LI be managed c) What would be the relation between LI and the various LUGs The last (not a part of the constitution) would have to be "who will register LI". If I see no drafts in half a day, I will try to provide a working draft for your consideration. Regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 21:30:09 2000 Received: from alpha.integramicro.co.in (unknown [202.142.67.156]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9404A0A7 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kamath (kamath [192.5.2.100]) by alpha.integramicro.co.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA32710 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:56:40 +0530 Message-ID: <005001c016f1$7852de00$640205c0@integramicro.co.in> From: "Girish Kamath" To: References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 09:56:32 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Archive-Number: 200009/34 Yes . Regards, Girish Kamath. > Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be sent to PCQ > about IT.COM ? There shall be no more discussion on the topic. But > a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the list within the next > 24 hours. > > I will then collect all the "yes" votes and add the signatories to > the letter and forward it to PCQ. > From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 22:27:06 2000 Received: from rmx194-mta.mail.com (rmx194-mta.mail.com [165.251.48.41]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9625C4A125 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:27:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web135-mc.mail.com (web135-mc.mail.com [165.251.48.161]) by rmx194-mta.mail.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA27949 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 01:23:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <382714048.968131406687.JavaMail.root@web135-mc.mail.com> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 01:23:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 203.197.174.105 X-Archive-Number: 200009/35 I, naturally, vote yes. On reviewing my posts over the last few days, I realize some of the phraseology will have been hurtful, if not offensive. I apologise to anybody who was offended. Nevertheless, I stand by my views, particularly on the unwarranted secrecy of this list. I will forward the archives to *any* member of my LUG who requests them. This list has nothing to hide. I hope we can now move on to more constructive topics. I have a "fill-in-the-blanks" constitution that is typical of those used by many registered associations. I will forward it to this list for study as soon as I get a soft copy. I hope it will be useful. Biju ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 4 22:30:34 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAAD4A19D for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA13455 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:28:06 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:28:06 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Message-ID: <20000904222806.A13437@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <382714048.968131406687.JavaMail.root@web135-mc.mail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <382714048.968131406687.JavaMail.root@web135-mc.mail.com>; from botsie@mail.com on Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 01:23:26AM -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/36 On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 01:23:26AM -0400, Biju Chacko wrote: > I have a "fill-in-the-blanks" constitution that is typical of those used by > many registered associations. I will forward it to this list for study as > soon as I get a soft copy. I hope it will be useful. Great! Having more than one proposal would be good. I hate to see LI settling on a constitution that wins by default. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 00:39:28 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BAF04A1F8 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 785 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:55:53 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13WDDr-0000EE-00 for ; Tue, 05 Sep 2000 13:02:47 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:02:46 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20000904092642.A11709@sharmas.dhs.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14772.41268.222325.743055@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/37 hi, >>>>> "Arun" == Arun Sharma writes: Arun> All, Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be Arun> sent to PCQ about IT.COM ? There shall be no more discussion Arun> on the topic. But a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the Arun> list within the next 24 hours. Arun> Signed by: Arun> Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan Arun> K. Dakshinamurthy Gurunandan Bhat Yes. This is fine with me. prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 07:46:03 2000 Received: from mail.jindalonline.net (unknown [202.136.128.18]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33DAC4A1C7 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 07:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from neo ([202.136.129.109]) by mail.jindalonline.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA20069; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 19:55:50 +0530 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 19:55:45 +0530 From: Naheed Vora To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Cc: nv@linuxstart.com Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? Message-Id: <20000905195545.5721c37f.nv@Linuxstart.com> In-Reply-To: <200009041644.e84GiIB13747@tbird.iworld.com> References: <200009041644.e84GiIB13747@tbird.iworld.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.3.26 (GTK+ 1.2.8; Linux 2.2.14-12; i686) Organization: Linux User's Group of Ahmedabad Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/38 Sorry, for not being on time, but Better late then never, So, here is my affirmation.. Yes from me, Naheed Luga On Mon, 4 Sep 2000 12:44:18 -0400 Arun Sharma wrote: > All, > > Could we have a quick vote on this draft letter to be sent to PCQ > about IT.COM ? There shall be no more discussion on the topic. But > a simple "yes" or "no" to be mailed to the list within the next > 24 hours. > > I will then collect all the "yes" votes and add the signatories to > the letter and forward it to PCQ. > > Now on to our regularly scheduled program. > > -Arun > -- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 10:26:46 2000 Received: from blr.vsnl.net.in (blr.vsnl.net.in [202.54.12.6]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FC94A0E4 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:26:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@PPP-181-153.bng.vsnl.net.in [203.197.181.153]) by blr.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA22680 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 22:50:09 +0530 (IST) From: kdmurthy@vsnl.com Received: from localhost (kd@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA01461 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 22:41:28 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: kd owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 22:41:28 +0530 (IST) X-Sender: kd@localhost.localdomain To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: <14772.41268.222325.743055@monster.linux.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/39 Yes by all means. -- KD From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 11:55:19 2000 Received: from blr.vsnl.net.in (blr.vsnl.net.in [202.54.12.6]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B214A132 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 11:55:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@PPP-176-236.bng.vsnl.net.in [203.197.176.236]) by blr.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA08336 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:18:42 +0530 (IST) From: kdmurthy@vsnl.com Received: from localhost (kd@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA01131 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:21:03 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: kd owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:21:03 +0530 (IST) X-Sender: kd@localhost.localdomain To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/40 On Tue, 5 Sep 2000 kdmurthy@vsnl.com wrote: > > Yes by all means. > OOPS. Not supposed to vote ;-). Arun, you can consider this as my concurrence to sign on my behalf. -- KD From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 18:37:08 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C5F4A09B for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 18:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e861OgV27060 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 18:24:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0FZ2300.VBQ for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 18:34:51 -0700 Message-ID: <39B59F3B.5375F395@netscape.com> Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 18:34:51 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: New subscribers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/41 Hi, I got back from a week's vacation only recently. Got to my email today. Have not caught up with the discussions going on here. I will read and respond to emails in the next day. In the meantime, I'd like to announce 2 new subscribers to this list: Raju Mathur (ILUG-Delhi) Nikhil (ILUG-Hyd) Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 20:40:42 2000 Received: from ganwaar.com (unknown [203.94.254.182]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4156A4A43A for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:40:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from raju@localhost) by ganwaar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA03949; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:08:12 +0530 From: Raju Mathur MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14773.48164.62874.962887@localhost.localdomain> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:08:12 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org X-Archive-Number: 200009/42 I missed the first few mails regarding the vote. What are we voting on? -- Raju >>>>> "kdmurthy" == kdmurthy writes: kdmurthy> On Tue, 5 Sep 2000 kdmurthy@vsnl.com wrote: >> Yes by all means. >> kdmurthy> OOPS. Not supposed to vote ;-). kdmurthy> Arun, you can consider this as my concurrence to sign on kdmurthy> my behalf. kdmurthy> -- KD kdmurthy> --------------------------------------- Please respect kdmurthy> the privacy of this list. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 5 23:29:34 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F171A4A20F for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:29:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA17179 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:27:07 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:27:07 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: [adsharma@sharmas.dhs.org: Re: [LIG] Linux India registration.] Message-ID: <20000905232707.A17163@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="6TrnltStXW4iwmi0" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/43 --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:25:26 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: linux-india-general@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: [LIG] Linux India registration. Message-ID: <20000905232526.A17123@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20000904141114.A12405@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from nikk@iimk.ren.nic.in on Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 03:12:41PM +0530 On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 03:12:41PM +0530, Nikhil Datta wrote: Nikk, > Hi arun, > I hope this is the right forum to discuss LI-registration. Absolutely! > I've been watching the ilug-b'lore list lately, and been in touch with > Atul about IT COM. The feedback I've got is that PCQ needs to have LI > Registered to sponsor it, and LI Registration is taking time. That's correct. > > Is it possible to have an open list to discuss LI Reg matters, rather than > the current closed list? I'm not able to contribute to the registration > process myself, but I would like to know what the progress is. > I will pass your request on. At the minimum, we should be able to get weekly digests out to LIG. The onyl reason I might not be able to post weekly digests to LIG is that I don't have the time. > I think the open source, open idea model has proved itself sufficiently > for us to not have to resort to a closed list to do the decision making. One of the main concerns has been the feasibility of forming a national LUG - given the diversity of people and their perceptions of each other. One of the ideas behind keeping the list closed was to minimize the noise on the list and take it to a conclusion in a time bound manner. Each LUG has nominated a representative - I believe we have full coverage of all the known LUGs now. The reps are fully expected to discuss on their local mailing lists, issues of importance and voice it on the list. > > I was at IT COM last year, and it was a blast and a great success. I > definitely intend to be there this year as well, maybe even in a tux;) > I wasn't there, but have heard good things about it. Hope it'll be just as good or even better this year too. > I think the list should be opened, and let anyone willing contribute. My personal opinion (not necessarily that of people on li-reg) is that the weekly digests be published in a timely manner and parallel discussions may proceed on fora like LIG. At the end of the discussion on li-reg, a "public preview" of the constitution be done, opinions collected, amendments proposed and passed by a simple majority on li-reg. I believe this is how the Indian constitution was done. -Arun [ I'm forwarding this to li-reg ] --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0-- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 6 00:55:46 2000 Received: from subexgroup.com (unknown [164.164.82.20]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EBF4A0BB for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kd1 by subexgroup.com with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.83.R) for ; Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:15:14 +0530 Message-ID: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> From: "Dakshinamurthy K" To: Subject: Could you people allow me to retire (!) Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:23:27 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org X-Return-Path: kdmurthy@vsnl.com X-Archive-Number: 200009/44 Dear Friends, It is clear that I cannot handle the stress the registration issue is causing to me. Those of you who do not know, there is a offline *stink* being generated by some which I am not able to tolerate. Currently I am working as GM - Software development in Subex Systems, a Bangalore based telecom software company. I handle the software products division at Subex that has around 30 developers. Two of our products are in active development stage and one is already installed at 5 customer sites. Unfortunately, I do not have any second level managers here yet and I act as the project manager for all the projects. Considering the tight release plans we have it is really hectic job. I am interested in Linux India (ofcourse) and I hope that alleast those of you who know me believe that I have put in efforts to contribute (in my own way) to Linux India. If li-reg is the only forum where I need to think and contribute it would have been fine. However, that is not the case. My only reason being on this list was to handle legal registration issues. I mentioned to some of you that I wanted to take a permanent break from LI once the registration is over (and I hand over the domain to the society). Before, I sign off I apologize to both Raj Mathur and Indranil for not able to keep their trust. Thaths/Arun: It was great fun working on a common cause for so long. Thanks everyone for being so supportive. Thaths: Could I request you to remove my name from the li-reg list. Warm Regards Dakshinamurthy K From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 6 08:41:45 2000 Received: from ganwaar.com (unknown [203.94.254.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731A74A230 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 08:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from raju@localhost) by ganwaar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA02410; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 21:09:02 +0530 From: Raju Mathur MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14774.25877.582672.7261@localhost.localdomain> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 21:09:01 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Could you people allow me to retire (!) In-Reply-To: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org X-Archive-Number: 200009/45 No complaints, Just gloom. Thanks, KD. I hope I'll still see you in private life, even if not on the list. -- Raju >>>>> "KD" == Dakshinamurthy K writes: KD> Dear Friends, It is clear that I cannot handle the stress the KD> registration issue is causing to me. Those of you who do not KD> know, there is a offline *stink* being generated by some which KD> I am not able to tolerate. KD> Currently I am working as GM - Software KD> development in Subex Systems, a Bangalore based telecom KD> software company. I handle the software products division at KD> Subex that has around 30 developers. Two of our products are KD> in active development stage and one is already installed at 5 KD> customer sites. KD> Unfortunately, I do not have any second level managers here KD> yet and I act as the project manager for all the KD> projects. Considering the tight release plans we have it is KD> really hectic job. KD> I am interested in Linux India (ofcourse) and I hope that KD> alleast those of you who know me believe that I have put in KD> efforts to contribute (in my own way) to Linux India. If KD> li-reg is the only forum where I need to think and contribute KD> it would have been fine. However, that is not the case. KD> My only reason being on this list was to handle legal KD> registration issues. I mentioned to some of you that I wanted KD> to take a permanent break from LI once the registration is KD> over (and I hand over the domain to the society). KD> Before, I sign off I apologize to both Raj Mathur and Indranil KD> for not able to keep their trust. KD> Thaths/Arun: It was great fun working on a common cause for so KD> long. Thanks everyone for being so supportive. KD> Thaths: Could I request you to remove my name from the li-reg KD> list. KD> Warm Regards Dakshinamurthy K KD> --------------------------------------- Please respect the KD> privacy of this list. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 6 09:53:39 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473934A202 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA18497 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:51:09 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:51:09 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could you people allow me to retire (!) Message-ID: <20000906095109.E18304@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr>; from kdmurthy@vsnl.com on Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:23:27PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/46 On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:23:27PM +0530, Dakshinamurthy K wrote: KD, > > Thaths: Could I request you to remove my name from the li-reg list. > Thanks for all the good work you've done for LI. We'll miss you. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 6 14:55:17 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1574A175; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA19087; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:52:44 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:52:44 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: Krishna Kumar Cc: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org, Linux India General Subject: Re: IT.COM Message-ID: <20000906145244.A19075@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <4.3.0.20000901150657.00c8dd90@mail.cmil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20000901150657.00c8dd90@mail.cmil.com>; from kkkg@cmil.com on Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:18:21PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/47 Dear KK, It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an important event and it would be a shame to lose this opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade show. We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule to figure out the charter and the administrative details of Linux India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate the urgency of the matter. We also understand the difficulties you have in justifying the expenses incurred on a local LUG. Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore as the authorised organisation to handle all matters relating to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this year. We hope that Linux-India will have much to contribute to the Linux presence at IT.com from 2001 onwards. This was passed by an overwhelming majority on the Linux India registration mailing list. Signed by: Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan K. Dakshinamurthy G. Sagar - ILUG Bombay Vaibhav Sharma - ILUG Indore Gurunandan Bhat - ILUG Goa Girish Kamath - ILUG Mangalore Biju Chako - ILUG Bangalore Prabhu Ramachandran - ILUG Chennai Naheed Vora - ILUG Ahmedabad Nikhil - ILUG Hyderabad From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 6 21:24:58 2000 Received: from ganwaar.com (unknown [203.94.252.170]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4B04A257 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 21:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by ganwaar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01755 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:52:21 +0530 From: Raju Mathur MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14774.24698.813266.939011@localhost.localdomain> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:49:22 +0530 (IST) To: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" Subject: Re: Could we have a quick vote ? In-Reply-To: References: <14773.48164.62874.962887@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org X-Archive-Number: 200009/48 Yes. >>>>> "Guru" == Gurunandan R Bhat writes: Guru> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Raju Mathur wrote: I hope have the Guru> permission of Arun/Thaths/KD to reply to this: >> I missed the first few mails regarding the vote. What are we >> voting on? Guru> Nothing to do with the main task of this list. An Guru> allied matter that came up due to the following sequenceof Guru> events: Guru> 1) IT.com is coming up in November Guru> 2) PC Quest wants to sponsor a Linux pavillion like Guru> last year, but would prefer to route all sponsorship matters Guru> through a National registered Linux Organisation. There is Guru> none currently and this list is seized with setting one up. Guru> 3) Our discussion here should in no way be pressured Guru> by deadlines brought about by IT.com, important though that Guru> is. Guru> The solution: All coordinators sign a common letter to PCQ: Guru> The letter now reads (all signatories so far have been Guru> added): Guru> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Guru> Dear KK, Guru> It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an Guru> important event and it would be a shame to lose this Guru> opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade Guru> show. Guru> We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule Guru> to figure out the charter and the administrative details of Guru> Linux India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate Guru> the urgency of the matter. We also understand the Guru> difficulties you have in justifying the expenses incurred on Guru> a local LUG. Guru> Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore Guru> as the authorised organisation to handle all matters Guru> relating to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this Guru> year. We hope that Linux-India will have much to contribute Guru> to the Linux presence at IT.com from 2001 onwards." Guru> This was passed by an overwhelming majority on Linux India Guru> registration mailing list. Guru> Signed by: Guru> Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan Guru> K. Dakshinamurthy G. Sagar - ILUG Bombay Vaibhav Sharma - Guru> ILUG Indore Gurunandan Bhat - ILUG Goa Girish Kamath - ILUG Guru> Mangalore Biju Chako - ILUG Bangalore Prabhu Ramachandran - Guru> ILUG Chennai Naheed Vora - ILUG Ahmedabad Guru> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Guru> Since this is not directly related to the main task, we Guru> thought discussion on this letter, if at all, should take Guru> place off-list and not on this list. If you want to sign, Guru> Just say "Yes". From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 00:46:15 2000 Received: from mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (mumbai1.mtnl.net.in [203.94.227.51]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478DB4A332 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 00:30:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oldcomp by mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (8.9.1/1.1.20.3/27Mar00-0621PM) id MAA0000019681; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 12:58:08 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> From: "G.Sagar" To: References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> Subject: Re: Could you people allow me to retire (!) Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 12:59:53 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/49 Thanks KD. I hope to see you again next time you are in bby or me in b'lore. We'll miss you. Cheerio, Sagar. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dakshinamurthy K To: Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2000 1:23 PM Subject: [LI-Reg] Could you people allow me to retire (!) > Dear Friends, > > It is clear that I cannot handle the stress the registration issue is > causing to me. Those of you who do not know, there is a offline *stink* > being generated by some which I am not able to tolerate. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 03:02:00 2000 Received: from mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (mumbai1.mtnl.net.in [203.94.227.51]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C184A380 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 02:55:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oldcomp by mumbai1.mtnl.net.in (8.9.1/1.1.20.3/27Mar00-0621PM) id PAA0000030276; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 15:22:12 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp> From: "G.Sagar" To: References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> Subject: A Question. Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 15:20:50 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/50 ILUG-Bom has a core panel of members and we have our own list. I am being asked to forward all LI-Reg mails to that list (abt 10-12 people). Can I do that ? Cheerio, Sagar. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:07:38 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A1B74A04E for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA21835 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:05:04 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:05:04 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: A Question. Message-ID: <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp>; from sagarg@bol.net.in on Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:20:50PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/51 On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:20:50PM +0530, G.Sagar wrote: > ILUG-Bom has a core panel of members and we have our own list. I am > being asked to forward all LI-Reg mails to that list (abt 10-12 people). > Can I do that ? Personally I don't have a problem with that. The primary reason for keeping the list closed is members getting heat about each and every thing they've said on the list and influencing their further voting on issues. Sort of like sequestering the jury in the western legal system. Since this has been raised by Biju too, could we have a quick focussed discussion on this ? Please don't bring in other issues in this thread and keep the scope very narrow. The proposals in chronological order: (a) Keep the list private, archives published at the end of discussion (b) Make the list private, archives published weekly (c) Make the list read only, archives public and messages forwardable -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:12:35 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B484A21B for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA21886 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:10:04 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:10:04 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Request from PCQ Message-ID: <20000907091004.A21867@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/52 Dear coordinators, This is re: the just concluded voting about IT.COM. I've received a request from PCQ asking that the coordinators forward the proposal about ILUG Bangalore representing Linux India at IT.COM to their respective local LUG mailing list to make sure that everyone is aware of it. Could the coordinators do the needful ? You could just forward my earlier message to PCQ to your lists if you wish. This will result in ILUG Bangalore registering itself before Linux India itself. Thanks! -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:23:20 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8273C4A1E4 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:23:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 737 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 21:44:54 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13X4R6-0000qF-00 for ; Thu, 07 Sep 2000 21:52:00 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 21:52:00 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Request from PCQ In-Reply-To: <20000907091004.A21867@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20000907091004.A21867@sharmas.dhs.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14775.49183.70699.461735@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/53 hi, For those of us who havent saved that message can someone please send a copy to this list again? There are no archives for li-reg so I couldnt get it there either. prabhu p.s. I am busy (I have a couple of tests) this weekend - which is why I have no comments on the constitution yet. By next week I will try to contribute. Sorry. >>>>> "Arun" == Arun Sharma writes: Arun> Dear coordinators, This is re: the just concluded voting Arun> about IT.COM. I've received a request from PCQ asking that Arun> the coordinators forward the proposal about ILUG Bangalore Arun> representing Linux India at IT.COM to their respective local Arun> LUG mailing list to make sure that everyone is aware of it. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:28:38 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A0844A18E for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e87GG1V16243 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0IYZP00.2YX for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:26:13 -0700 Message-ID: <39B7C1A4.5B4E0066@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 09:26:12 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: A Question. References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/54 Arun Sharma proclaimed: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:20:50PM +0530, G.Sagar wrote: > > ILUG-Bom has a core panel of members and we have our own list. I am > > being asked to forward all LI-Reg mails to that list (abt 10-12 people). > > Can I do that ? > Since this has been raised by Biju too, could we have a quick focussed > discussion on this ? Please don't bring in other issues in this thread > and keep the scope very narrow. > I have been thinking about this issue too. The point, as Arun indicated, in keeping this list private was NOT to exclude the others from seeing what was going on. It was to make sure that we were not fighting on two fronts (li-reg and LIG) on resolving the issue of LI. > The proposals in chronological order: > > (a) Keep the list private, archives published at the end of discussion Doable. Have already promised this on LIG. > (b) Make the list private, archives published weekly I was originally thinking of sending out a weekly digest of the li-reg list to LIG. But doing that would mean that the first 2 week's worth of posts to li-reg would not reach LIG. > (c) Make the list read only, archives public and messages forwardable I can easily set up the browsable archives of li-reg at http://lists.linux-india.org/cgi-bin/wilma/li-reg I think option 'a' or 'c' are the easiest to do. I am leaning towards 'c'. If I don't hear any major complaints about that path or other doable suggestions, I will go with it in 24 hours. OK with everyone? Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:50:37 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-47.netscape.com [205.217.237.47]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A426C4A26F for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e87Gg8u27144 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:42:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0J00901.7ZJ for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:48:09 -0700 Message-ID: <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 09:48:08 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org> <20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in> <20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org> <14761.26086.806460.112042@monster.linux.in> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/55 Prabhu Ramachandran proclaimed: > (1) Why do we need a national level body? > > If it is to just keep in touch, no formality is required. We can > just have a dedicated mailing list. If the need arises issues can > be settled there. One overwhelming sentiment that I heard when I visited some ILUGs in India almost a year ago was that thew LI mailing lists have too much traffic and that many people were subscribed to the ILUG m.l. and not LI. > If it is to manage national linux related events, well, that is > rather hard. I'd like to think of LUG's as more informal groups. The basic idea behind LI, IMO, is to have a national body that can co-ordinate large nation-wide events. Perhaps even be the equivalent of Linux International. The local ILUGs staying informal groups is probably what is going to happen. But one major problem would be the interaction between the local, informal ILUG and the national, formal LI. The representative of the ILUG in the national LI should be aware of the different modes of operation, > As one member at ILUGC put it, some of us would like to think of > LI/Local LUG's as clubs of people who share a common passion for an > open source (put your favourite choice of words here) OS. Putting a > formal body seems to destroy that spirit. If a local ILUG thinks that formalizing itself is not needed, then it should have the freedom to be remain informal. But, as I have indicated, problems might arise if / when things have to be coordinated with the national body. Also keep in mind that if ILUG-C does not register itself as a formal body, some "rougue" (for lack of a better word) ILUG-C might be registered by someone wanting to make a quick buck / have free PR. > (2) I think some of us need some history lessons. :) Why did this > deal of creating a non profit organisation come up at all? It came up after last year's experience with IT.com where a need for a national face for LI was felt. > (3) What is wrong currently? What problems do we foresee?? Take the case of the domain linux.or.in (or something like that). This domain was registered by a for-profit company. If a national LI existed, this body could have formally asked the for-profit company to hand over the domain. > (a) Do we have issues between LUGs right now? Or do we foresee ones > in the future? The biggest issue I see between the LUGs is distrust. There. I am going to come out and say it: Various LUGs think that ILUG-Blr is assuming the role of a national body. Some people in ILUG-Blr have expressed concern that Linux Delhi (not ILUG-Delhi ;-) has plans to form a formal body by itself and take the reigns. Others have expreses distrust about ILUG-Bom. A few others have complained about the Linux India booth at last year's IT.com also having flyers from a certain commercial Linux interest. Honestly, all this distrust makes me want to throw my hands up and throw away all this. > (b) Are we ever going to organize events on a huge national scale as > LI? i.e. Is LI going to organize a national event on linux? It might. Thaths PS: Sorry for bringing these things up in this week. I just wanted to get my 2c in. Let us work on the constitution. -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:51:15 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-47.netscape.com [205.217.237.47]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F374A296 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:51:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e87Ggou27349 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0J01H03.D0U for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:48:53 -0700 Message-ID: <39B7C6F5.781DBAF1@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 09:48:53 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we resume the discussion ? References: <20000831105206.A1381@sharmas.dhs.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/56 Arun Sharma proclaimed: > on the weightage by membership issue ? > > The primary thing I'm trying to address is, the vote of a ILUG representing > 5 people, overriding that of a member representing 100 people. No weightage, IMO. Too complex. And bound to be misused. Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 09:59:01 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D6FD4A250 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e87GkSV22485 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:46:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0J0EG00.8WH for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:56:40 -0700 Message-ID: <39B7C8C8.144EB8BB@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 09:56:40 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Could we resume the discussion ? References: <20000831105206.A1381@sharmas.dhs.org> <14766.40490.704017.258255@monster.linux.in> <20000831124730.A1508@sharmas.dhs.org> <39AF1551.6E8FF915@vsnl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/57 Raghavendra Bhat proclaimed: > Arun Sharma wrote: > > If we need to deal with money, we have to be formal and legal. > Where was the money when LI was first formed ? When LI was formed there were very few people. In fact, you could count the number with the fingers of your hand. Now there are lots more people. Money, in itself, is not evil. A lot of the money needed to run LI is currently coming in from voluntary contributions in kind. Take, for example, the machine lists.linux-india.org. I pay for the bandwidth and the electricity for that machine. It is not much out of my pocket and I really don't mind. But one day I might get hit by a truck. Who is going to foot the bill for the list then? > Now some see money...as Prabhu said > "Whose money ?" Suddenly the idea of formalization and that too, > many wanting this process to be hurried through with speed; connecting > this to a very insignificant issue called an IT.com. Formalization has been kicked around for over a year now. IT.com is merely a catalyst that might, hopefully, fasten this process. > Within a legal framework, one has to be rigid and formal. I am not > saying that we should/can break laws by banding ourselves as an > informal group. In which case, you should strive to have very few legal issues as possible, Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 10:10:37 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F2CE4A0B4 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e87Gw3V24777 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:58:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0J0XR03.50X for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:08:15 -0700 Message-ID: <39B7CB7E.5859F7BD@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:08:14 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Please read References: <383122985.967967844438.JavaMail.root@web307-mc.mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/58 Biju Chacko proclaimed: > *I* had very little idea of the scale of the problem until Saturday. > However, Arun, Thaths and KD as well as various others have been aware of > this since *November* last year (last IT.COM). Arun, and I have /not/ been aware of the scale of any problem. Probably KD too. PCQ or any for-profit entity has not confided their balance sheet and auditors report with us. > People have been formally asking for this process to be started since > February. I am not sure why it has been delayed so long. Various reasons. Mainly, distrust among the various ILUGs. There. I've come out and said it. > Don't hurry it up. I never asked that it be hurried up. Just that it be > completed in the advertised four weeks. And that assurance be conveyed to > PCQ. Better to do it late and do it right, than to do it wrong. Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 10:11:26 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A1CE4A0DC for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:11:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA22041 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:08:54 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:08:54 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Request from PCQ Message-ID: <20000907100854.A22024@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20000907091004.A21867@sharmas.dhs.org> <14775.49183.70699.461735@monster.linux.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <14775.49183.70699.461735@monster.linux.in>; from prabhu@aero.iitm.ernet.in on Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:52:00PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/59 --HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:52:00PM +0530, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > hi, > > For those of us who havent saved that message can someone > please send a copy to this list again? There are no archives for > li-reg so I couldnt get it there either. > Here's a copy with Indranil and Raju added to the list. -Arun --HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=pcq-letter Dear KK, It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an important event and it would be a shame to lose this opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade show. We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule to figure out the charter and the administrative details of Linux India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate the urgency of the matter. We also understand the difficulties you have in justifying the expenses incurred on a local LUG. Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore as the authorised organisation to handle all matters relating to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this year. We hope that Linux-India will have much to contribute to the Linux presence at IT.com from 2001 onwards. This was passed by an overwhelming majority on the Linux India registration mailing list. Signed by: Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan K. Dakshinamurthy G. Sagar - ILUG Bombay Vaibhav Sharma - ILUG Indore Gurunandan Bhat - ILUG Goa Girish Kamath - ILUG Mangalore Biju Chako - ILUG Bangalore Prabhu Ramachandran - ILUG Chennai Naheed Vora - ILUG Ahmedabad Nikhil - ILUG Hyderabad Indranil Das Gupta - ILUG Calcutta Raju Mathur - ILUG Delhi --HlL+5n6rz5pIUxbD-- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 10:30:48 2000 Received: from ganwaar.com (unknown [203.94.252.63]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D10D4A170 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from raju@localhost) by ganwaar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA05196; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 22:57:55 +0530 From: Raju Mathur MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14775.53274.944100.855389@localhost.localdomain> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 22:57:54 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: A Question. In-Reply-To: <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org X-Archive-Number: 200009/60 >>>>> "Arun" == Arun Sharma writes: Arun> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:20:50PM +0530, G.Sagar wrote: >> ILUG-Bom has a core panel of members and we have our own >> list. I am being asked to forward all LI-Reg mails to that list >> (abt 10-12 people). Can I do that ? Arun> Personally I don't have a problem with that. The primary Arun> reason for keeping the list closed is members getting heat Arun> about each and every thing they've said on the list and Arun> influencing their further voting on issues. Sort of like Arun> sequestering the jury in the western legal system. Arun> Since this has been raised by Biju too, could we have a Arun> quick focussed discussion on this ? Please don't bring in Arun> other issues in this thread and keep the scope very narrow. Arun> The proposals in chronological order: Arun> (a) Keep the list private, archives published at the end of Arun> discussion (b) Make the list private, archives published Arun> weekly (c) Make the list read only, archives public and Arun> messages forwardable I'd go with (c), let everyone read, but comments should be forwarded through the regional representative, who is responsible for ensuring that they are the views of the majority of his/her (hah!) LUG. Regards, -- Raju Arun> -Arun Arun> --------------------------------------- Please respect the Arun> privacy of this list. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 7 13:29:48 2000 Received: from mobile.nikhilwiz.net (unknown [202.160.239.157]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C21A4A121 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nikhil@localhost) by mobile.nikhilwiz.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA00517 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 01:49:41 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: mobile.nikhilwiz.net: nikhil set sender to nikhilwiz@yahoo.com using -f Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 01:49:40 +0530 From: Nick Hill To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: A Question. Message-ID: <20000908014940.B461@mobile.nikhilwiz.net> References: <009d01c017d7$8a79a7d0$6f0110ac@subexblr> <00df01c0189d$6f1d57e0$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <011601c018b1$8b38b000$0201a8c0@oldcomp> <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.2i In-Reply-To: <20000907090504.A21805@sharmas.dhs.org>; from adsharma@sharmas.dhs.org on Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:05:04AM -0700 X-Operating-System: Linux mobile 2.4.0-test2-ac2 X-Archive-Number: 200009/61 On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:05:04AM -0700, Arun Sharma wrote: > (c) Make the list read only, archives public and messages forwardable > this makes a lot of sense than the other two. I was pressing for an open list since the initial announcement of li-reg, and i think this sort of pacifies everyone (including) me. and yeah, i agree with Raju that the discussions will go on in individual LUGs and the rep can bring in the relevant stuff in here for others to sit on it. Nikhil. > -Arun > > --------------------------------------- > Please respect the privacy of this list. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 00:22:56 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [61.11.13.246]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F27D4A03B for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00842 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:44:52 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:44:52 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution In-Reply-To: <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/62 On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Sudhakar Chandra wrote: > But one major problem would be the interaction between the local, > informal ILUG and the national, formal LI. That IMO would be the core of our charter. We could list out the various levels of affiliation between the LUGs and LI. > If a local ILUG thinks that formalizing itself is not needed, then it > should have the freedom to be remain informal. I agree. Usually national bodies (the IETE, is one example that comes to mind) enable affiliation on a per programme basis rather than on a permanent one. For example, I imagine the folowing scenario: LI organises/participates in a national event, calls for affiliates/partners from among the LUGS and puts out an announcement on LIG. Some join, other dont. Individuals whose LUGs are not affiliates to a particular program, also participate but as individuals. This way nobody is left out. > Also keep in mind that if ILUG-C does not register itself as a formal > body, some "rougue" (for lack of a better word) ILUG-C might be > registered by someone wanting to make a quick buck / have free PR. The need to "make a quick buck/have free PR" is a commonplace human characteristic, and it would be unrealistic to hope that mere registration will reduce free riders. Opportunities for Linux related events/programmes are so numerous these days that to believe that the LUG would be the sole torchbearer for Linus is mistaken. Recall a major national event in Delhi last year attended by MadDog. There so called "IT opinion builders" (and not rougue LUGs) tried to present a distorted view of Linux and its capabilities. If it were not for Atul Chitnis, Raju Mathur, Kishore Bhargava and a gent from the DOE who literally gatecrashed and saved the situation, much damage would have been done. On the other hand, imagine that LI were registered with Linux International. Maddog would naturally have alerted LI about his visit, if one existed. Wheels would have churned and the situation could have been saved, or even prevented from arising at all at much lower cost to the individuals who saw it important enough to participate. [quoting Prabhu here] > > (3) What is wrong currently? What problems do we > > foresee?? > > Take the case of the domain linux.or.in (or something like that). This > domain was registered by a for-profit company. If a national LI existed, > this body could have formally asked the for-profit company to hand over the > domain. Point. > The biggest issue I see between the LUGs is distrust. Registration will not help much here, I am afraid, if this distrust exists at all. Obviously an organisation cannot legislate against distrust. What it can do however, is to increase person-to-person interaction between LUGS, common programmes and community events and hope that distrust dies as a result of this. > Some people in ILUG-Blr have expressed concern that Linux Delhi (not > ILUG-Delhi ;-) has plans to form a formal body by itself and take the > reigns. [and] > A few others have complained about the Linux India booth at last > year's IT.com also having flyers from a certain commercial Linux > interest. Just the the rumour/half-truth that irrational distrust can breed. The first can be curtailed (not eliminated) if a National body with proper representation from all fellow travellers comes to exist. Rumours of the second kind will continue to be whispered, though. In the case in point, it was not just one organisation that had flyers. If memory serves, there were atleast six others. And the matter was discussed and agreed upon by all who coordinated the pavillion. Here too, a national organisation with clear-cut sponsorship/advertsing guidelines in LI events, worked out through consensus can serve to reduce this kind of distrust. > Honestly, all this distrust makes me want to throw my hands up and throw > away all this. It makes me want to get LI registered quickly ;) > Let us work on the constitution. Ya, lets. To reiterate an important point: Lets try to build in "per-programme/event" affiliation between the LUGS and LI (initiable from both sides) rather than a permanently bonded one. Hopefully this will reduce the fear of LI overwhelming the LUGs. Regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 00:26:43 2000 Received: from web2305.mail.yahoo.com (web2305.mail.yahoo.com [128.11.68.80]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D5044A052 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20000908072414.3503.qmail@web2305.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.11.12.220] by web2305.mail.yahoo.com; Fri, 08 Sep 2000 00:24:14 PDT Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:24:14 -0700 (PDT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?VaibhaV=20Sharma?= Subject: Re: A Question. To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/63 I think the third option is better.... i.e. to make the list readable for everyone except the selected people that we have on this list right now. So anyone joining now would not be able to post but would receive the messages that flow on this list. Is this feasible? VaibhaV > (a) Keep the list private, archives published at the > end of discussion > (b) Make the list private, archives published weekly > (c) Make the list read only, archives public and > messages forwardable __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 00:36:10 2000 Received: from web2306.mail.yahoo.com (web2306.mail.yahoo.com [128.11.68.151]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A2AC4A023 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20000908073343.16972.qmail@web2306.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.11.12.220] by web2306.mail.yahoo.com; Fri, 08 Sep 2000 00:33:43 PDT Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:33:43 -0700 (PDT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?VaibhaV=20Sharma?= Subject: Re: Request from PCQ To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/64 Already done that.... as it was an issue of voting. But as I expected... no replies till now. VaibhaV --- Arun Sharma wrote: > Dear coordinators, > > This is re: the just concluded voting about IT.COM. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 02:30:38 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9A84A1B1 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 02:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp110-106.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.110.106]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id PAA20202 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 15:36:21 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <004601c01977$b4cfe520$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: Subject: Suggestion abt the poll results Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 14:24:43 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Archive-Number: 200009/65 Arun/Thaths/All: IMO, even though li-reg archives are now in public-domain, given the reactions from some ppl, you should publish the result of the voting on the IT.COM2K participation issue on LIG in the following format: 1. Topic of the poll -- ILUG-BLR acting as LI proxy for IT.COM 2K 2. Total votes a> votes in favor; b> votes against; c> abstained from voting. Thereby removing *any* scope for questioning the blanket term "passed with overwhelming majority" or issues abt "voices not being heard" at any time -- now or in the future. --indra. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 02:31:08 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB2874A22B for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 02:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp110-106.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.110.106]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id PAA20337 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 15:36:23 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <004701c01977$b70a92e0$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: References: Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 15:02:26 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Archive-Number: 200009/66 Hi, ----- Original Message ----- From: Gurunandan R. Bhat To: Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 12:44 PM Subject: Re: [LI-Reg] Thoughts about constitution > On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Sudhakar Chandra wrote: > > > But one major problem would be the interaction between the local, > > informal ILUG and the national, formal LI. > I agree. Usually national bodies (the IETE, is one example that comes to > mind) enable affiliation on a per programme basis rather than on a > permanent one. For example, I imagine the folowing scenario: LI > organises/participates in a national event, calls for affiliates/partners > from among the LUGS and puts out an announcement on LIG. Some join, other > dont. Individuals whose LUGs are not affiliates to a particular program, > also participate but as individuals. This way nobody is left out. Sounds good, but.... [1] Abt relationship between LI and the local LUGs... how does LI recognise a local LUG? I suppose all the LUGs conforming to the ILUG- namespace could get automatical recognition with LI. [2] If we are talking about a loose structure wrt LI and local LUGs as suggested, who/how to constitute the "governing body" of LI ? Already certain less-than-properly-informed individuals (given the earlier closed nature of LI-REG, I don't want to read anything else in his response) are claiming this panel (li-reg) to be "self-appointed". While Arun and Thaths have seen that the lack of info is rectified, unless the nature of representation in the LI governing body from the different ILUGs is *very, very* clearly laid-out there is a likely chance of misinterpretation of actions taken by the body. [3] How about something like a overall membership of the LUGs with LI and an event-specific interactive mode of operation. As long as LI governing body is constituted with representations from ILUGs registered with it and works accroding to democratic principles, I *fail* to see how/what can fan ppl's fear of LI swamping the LUGs. Case in hand -- ILUG-BLR acting as proxy for LI for the proposed participation in IT.COM 2000, where was no confusion in the voting process or doubts about its results, unlike as in the case of distribution of brochures by "certain commercial interests" in last year's IT.COM. Everything is transparent. [4] Even before we have any formal body in place there is talk of ppl wanting out or saying that they would not be part of the process/proposed structure. In this situation it is not too far-fetch to imagine what can happen if a local LUG membership forks... What should be the status of any breakaway faction vis a vis the existing one wrt to LI? [5] I agree with Arun that having a weighted representation on LI based directly on the number of members in each LUG is a difficult proposition, and one that is open to abuse/misuse and doubts/suspicions. Likewise Nikk's post on LIG that a 300 member LUG != 6 member LUG can't be wished away. I somewhat liked the idea of weightage/membership classification of LI --> LUGs based on Arun's latter suggestion -- metro, non-metro, towns and villages. > > Also keep in mind that if ILUG-C does not register itself as a formal > > body, some "rougue" (for lack of a better word) ILUG-C might be > > registered by someone wanting to make a quick buck / have free PR. Simple! We protect our own! We remain alert! We police our own neighbourhoods. And with LI and rest of the Linux-Indian community behind us we can form a to-be-reckoned-with pressure-group to keep the "wolves" at bay :) > The need to "make a quick buck/have free PR" is a commonplace human > characteristic, and it would be unrealistic to hope that mere registration > will reduce free riders. Very true, if you can't beat them, you join them... if you are concerned that your organisation namespace might be facing a threat from "for-profit" interests, stake out the territory before they do. Besides as long as the LUGs conform to the ILUG namespace, there is very little that the free-loaders can really achieve. Think about it... what can a "for-profit" entity achieve by registering ILUG-Chennai... we have far too much representation among the IT industry, media and user-base for the "rogues" to extract anything but notoriety and get their names dragged through the mud for the attempt. If anything they will hurt themselves by such an attempt then us. > > A few others have complained about the Linux India booth at last > > year's IT.com also having flyers from a certain commercial Linux > > interest. > were atleast six others. And the matter was discussed and agreed upon by > all who coordinated the pavillion. IIRC, *that* fact was not known to many people. Even I had a bit of concern abt this issue last year, till (prolly?) Thaths explained the background to me. IMHO, it would have helped if that info was in the public domain -- lack-of-info + niggling-doubts + word-of-mouth = a-very-dangerous-combination that can hurt LI. > clear-cut sponsorship/advertsing guidelines in LI events, worked out > through consensus can serve to reduce this kind of distrust. As well as some sort of "code-of-conduct" for the volunteer participants. > > Honestly, all this distrust makes me want to throw my hands up and throw > > away all this. > > It makes me want to get LI registered quickly ;) Amen! ;) However Utopian it may sound, our guiding principle in all these matter should be to rise above our individual personal, regional-interests and work for the much larger interest of Linux in India as a whole. --indra. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 09:21:55 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752154A2C2 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA24534 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:19:16 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:19:15 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Suggestion abt the poll results Message-ID: <20000908091915.A24516@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <004601c01977$b4cfe520$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <004601c01977$b4cfe520$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in>; from indradg@cal.vsnl.net.in on Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 02:24:43PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/67 On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 02:24:43PM +0530, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: > Arun/Thaths/All: > > IMO, even though li-reg archives are now in public-domain, given the > reactions from some ppl, you should publish the result of the voting > on the IT.COM2K participation issue on LIG in the following format: Good idea. I was wondering if we could use some polling software. One of the issues is - people should vote independently and come to know about the results at the end of polling, rather than during the polling. But that's just my opinion. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 10:20:40 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FEA74A103 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e88H80V00231 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0KW2D02.A4R for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:18:13 -0700 Message-ID: <39B91F55.8B311437@netscape.com> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:18:13 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: A Question. References: <20000908072414.3503.qmail@web2305.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/68 VaibhaV Sharma proclaimed: > I think the third option is better.... > i.e. to make the list readable for everyone except the > selected people that we have on this list right now. > > So anyone joining now would not be able to post but > would receive the messages that flow on this list. > > Is this feasible? > > (a) Keep the list private, archives published at the > > end of discussion > > (b) Make the list private, archives published weekly > > (c) Make the list read only, archives public and > > messages forwardable The archives of li-reg are now public. The archives are at http://lists.linux-india.org/cgi-bin/wilma/li-reg Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 8 10:21:33 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-46.netscape.com [205.217.237.46]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CA44A1F1 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:21:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e88H8sV00355 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0KW3V03.B4S for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:19:07 -0700 Message-ID: <39B91F8B.48A04708@netscape.com> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:19:07 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Suggestion abt the poll results References: <004601c01977$b4cfe520$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> <20000908091915.A24516@sharmas.dhs.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/69 Arun Sharma proclaimed: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 02:24:43PM +0530, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: > > IMO, even though li-reg archives are now in public-domain, given the > > reactions from some ppl, you should publish the result of the voting > > on the IT.COM2K participation issue on LIG in the following format: > Good idea. I was wondering if we could use some polling software. One > of the issues is - people should vote independently and come to know > about the results at the end of polling, rather than during the polling. > But that's just my opinion. I'll investigate the polling software that is used by Debian. Might take a couple of days. Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 9 10:34:53 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [61.11.13.77]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052F14A133 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 10:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA00914 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 23:02:15 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 23:02:15 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution In-Reply-To: <004701c01977$b70a92e0$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/70 On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: when I (Gurunandan) said: > > enable affiliation on a per programme basis rather than on a > > permanent one. > Sounds good, but.... > > [1] Abt relationship between LI and the local LUGs... how does LI > recognise a local LUG? In the same way that Thaths/Arun/KD generated the subscriber-list for this mailing list. Most LUGs have a mailing list and a coordinator who gives calls for monthly meets and posts minutes. For cities that do not have a LUG, we merely recognise the first :substantial: group of independent individuals who approach LI with a desire to affiliate themselves. > [2] If we are talking about a loose structure wrt LI and local LUGs as > suggested, who/how to constitute the "governing body" of LI ? Good question. The structure is "loose" so as to enable LUGs to choose what events and programmes they participate in. I suggest this since affliation with LI cannot be forced upon a LUG. This includes a desire to participate in the process of nominating members to LI, which too cannot be legislated. If no LUG comes forward to nominate the LI governing council, so be it. It would be a sign that LI as percieved by LUGs was largely redundant/irrelevant and therefore no cause for grief. I could live with that. > unless the nature of representation in the LI governing body from the > different ILUGs is *very, very* clearly laid-out there is a likely > chance of misinterpretation of actions taken by the body. I agree that the "nature of representation" of LUGs in LI must be clearly laid down. What I meant was that having laid this down, there is nothing you can do if a LUG refuses to participate in constructing this representation. Do we then exclude such LUGs from LI for ever? Unfair IMO. > [3] How about something like a overall membership of the LUGs with LI > and an event-specific interactive mode of operation. This expresses what I had in mind nicely. > [4] Even before we have any formal body in place there is talk of ppl > wanting out or saying that they would not be part of the > process/proposed structure. I believe that this is due to lack of a clear statement of what LI would stand for and what it would do. Once we draft this part clearly, and do it well, a LUG would refuse to participate in LI to its own detriment. On the other hand, if LUGs refuse to participate in LI, even with a clear statement in place, it would point to a flawed charter rather than a misguided LUG. > what can happen if a local LUG membership forks... What should be the > status of any breakaway faction vis a vis the existing one wrt to LI? Tentative solutions: 1) We back the one that commands the faith of the majority. 2) We back both and invite their participation in LI. > [5] I agree with Arun that having a weighted representation on LI > based directly on the number of members in each LUG is a difficult > proposition, and one that is open to abuse/misuse and > doubts/suspicions. I thought Arun initially held the view that weighted representation is a Good Thing. Please correct me. > I somewhat liked the idea of weightage/membership classification of LI > --> LUGs based on Arun's latter suggestion -- metro, non-metro, towns > and villages. I urge you to see the consequences of this: Two large LUGs (hypothetically Bangalore and Delhi) would have enough representation on LI to decide and rule on matters that affect the rest of the ten to twelve LUGs who probably have a larger combined representation. Think why India has had 9 out ten PMs from the state of U.P. Regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sat Sep 9 21:01:44 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0853C4A14C for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 21:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA27264 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 20:59:01 -0700 Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 20:59:00 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution Message-ID: <20000909205900.B27201@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <004701c01977$b70a92e0$0b7cc5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from grbhat@softhome.net on Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:02:15PM +0530 X-Archive-Number: 200009/71 On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:02:15PM +0530, Gurunandan R. Bhat wrote: > > [5] I agree with Arun that having a weighted representation on LI > > based directly on the number of members in each LUG is a difficult > > proposition, and one that is open to abuse/misuse and > > doubts/suspicions. > > I thought Arun initially held the view that weighted representation is a > Good Thing. Please correct me. > That's right. I think some kind of weightage is necessary, but implementing it is going to be tricky - which is why I suggested some kind of broad classification. > I urge you to see the consequences of this: Two large LUGs (hypothetically > Bangalore and Delhi) would have enough representation on LI to decide and > rule on matters that affect the rest of the ten to twelve LUGs who > probably have a larger combined representation. Think why India has had 9 > out ten PMs from the state of U.P. That's possible only if the voting patterns among other LUGs is heterogeneous and the pattern in the dominant LUGs is homogeneous. A good counter example is Awami League (Bangladeshi party) getting a majority in the 1970 elections in Pakistan. -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 10 18:52:41 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73DC54A0B6 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:52:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA29229 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:49:49 -0700 Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:49:49 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: PCQ and IT.COM Message-ID: <20000910184949.A29215@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/72 --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline All, Here is a message from KK at PCQ and my response to his message. Thought people here would be interested in knowing what's going on. -Arun --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from cmil.com (iml104.datareturn.com [216.46.230.105]) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA21441 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 07:49:19 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:49:25 -0500 Message-Id: <200009070949.AA314704188@cmil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "Krishna Kumar " Reply-To: To: Arun Sharma Subject: Re: IT.COM X-Mailer: Dear Arun, First of all, thanks for the flexibility and the confidence. We would gladly accept ILUG Bangalore as representing Linux India, till such time that Linux India discusses and finalises its charter, etc. We do appreciate that that could take time. That said, some minor issues still remain, but they can easily be resolved, now that we have taken this significant step forward. The first is that ILUG Bangalore is as yet not a legal body. So, can ILUG -Bangalore register itself fast? You could do a not -for profit society registration. I believe that ILUG-Bangalore has some apprehensions about registering now, thinking that the Linux community would see this in the wrong light as they could be seen as jumping the registration gun. If you and /or (but preferably and) Thaths ask them to do this, while the LI registration is pending, then that could be handled. The process should not take more than a week. I would be happy to help if required (in my personal capacity, given my previous experience with the Cooperative movement) In my original letter, I had raised the issue of factions, et al. Your mail also has some prominent LUGs missing in endorsing this idea. Delhi, Trivandrum,Cochin (I may seem to be partial to Kerala, but then I come from that part of the country ;-)) and Pune come to mind immediately. Your CCing your message to the lists should cover this problem. But, since we cannot monitor the discussions in all the regional lists, and to avoid possible claims of not being involved, of being short circuited, etc, may I suggest that that the Coordinators from each representative LUG email their own ILUG mailing lists, cc to me and you, stating that this nomination is being made for IT.COM, as LI is not formally structured and registered, and that such a nomination is acceptable. (The fact that the li-reg list is a private list and that all LUG members don't actually know what is being discussed there also weighs in my suggesting this small but important step). I know that this is a long letter, and hope you do not get the impression that I am trying to be difficult. PCQ just wants to ensure that all parties get a fair deal, and are protected from accusations or complications ( like we faced last year when it came to accounting for the expenses) later on. I assume that you will be addressing these minor issues and am restarting the IT.COM process here at PCQ. Could you please identify the coordinator of ILUG-Bangalore ( is that Jessica or is it Biju Chacko or is it someone else? Perhaps they will elect / appoint a new person, once they register themselves). I now need to get in touch with this person. PCQ has tried to be a propagator of Linux in India for many years now - nothing would please us more than being able to continue this role at IT.COM 2000. Once again, thanks for all the help and for understanding and acomodating our dilema. Regards kkkg -------------------- At 03:22 AM 9/7/00, Arun Sharma wrote: Dear KK, It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an important event and it would be a shame to lose this opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade show. We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule to figure out the charter and the administrative details of Linux India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate the urgency of the matter. We also understand the difficulties you have in justifying the expenses incurred on a local LUG. Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore as the authorised organisation to handle all matters relating to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this year. We hope that Linux-India will have much to contribute to the Linux presence at IT.com from 2001 onwards. This was passed by an overwhelming majority on the Linux India registration mailing list. Signed by: Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan K. Dakshinamurthy G. Sagar - ILUG Bombay Vaibhav Sharma - ILUG Indore Gurunandan Bhat - ILUG Goa Girish Kamath - ILUG Mangalore Biju Chako - ILUG Bangalore Prabhu Ramachandran - ILUG Chennai Naheed Vora - ILUG Ahmedabad Nikhil - ILUG Hyderabad --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:49:39 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: Krishna Kumar Subject: Re: IT.COM Message-ID: <20000907084939.B21674@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <200009070949.AA314704188@cmil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <200009070949.AA314704188@cmil.com>; from kkkg@cmil.com on Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:49:25AM -0500 On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:49:25AM -0500, Krishna Kumar wrote: Hi, > > Dear Arun, > > First of all, thanks for the flexibility and the confidence. > > We would gladly accept ILUG Bangalore as representing Linux India, > till such time that Linux India discusses and finalises its charter, > etc. We do appreciate that that could take time. That's great! > That said, some minor issues still remain, but they can easily be > resolved, now that we have taken this significant step forward. > The first is that ILUG Bangalore is as yet not a legal body. So, can > ILUG -Bangalore register itself fast? You could do a not -for profit > society registration. Biju Chako, the ILUG Bangalore coordinator thinks this can be done and that they're prepared for it. > I believe that ILUG-Bangalore has some apprehensions about registering > now, thinking that the Linux community would see this in the wrong > light as they could be seen as jumping the registration gun. If you > and /or (but preferably and) Thaths ask them to do this, while the LI > registration is pending, then that could be handled. Yes, this shouldn't be a problem at all. > The process should not take more than a week. I would be happy to help > if required (in my personal capacity, given my previous experience > with the Cooperative movement) Excellent. I'll pass this on to Biju, Atul and other ILUG Bangalore guys. > In my original letter, I had raised the issue of factions, et al. Your > mail also has some prominent LUGs missing in endorsing this idea. Delhi, > Trivandrum,Cochin (I may seem to be partial to Kerala, but then I come > from that part of the country ;-)) and Pune come to mind immediately. My wife is from Kerala too - so it's pretty important for me also :) Some ILUGs which endorsed, but not included in the list: Raju Mathur - ILUG Delhi (late) Indraneel - ILUG Calcutta (voted yes - but I made a mistake) Trivandrum hasn't voted. Cochin was the only vote which was negative. Pune hasn't participated much in LI activities historically. But we'll try to make sure that they know about the process and ensure their participation. I doubt if all the votes are representative of the opinions of their ILUGs, but in the absence of a formal structure, I take it as fairly close. We've encouraged the reps to discuss important issues on their local mailing lists. > Your CCing your message to the lists should cover this problem. > But, since we cannot monitor the discussions in all the regional lists, > and to avoid possible claims of not being involved, of being short > circuited, etc, may I suggest that that the Coordinators from each > representative LUG email their own ILUG mailing lists, cc to me and > you, stating that this nomination is being made for IT.COM, as LI is > not formally structured and registered, and that such a nomination is > acceptable. (The fact that the li-reg list is a private list and that > all LUG members don't actually know what is being discussed there also > weighs in my suggesting this small but important step). That's fine by me. I'll propose this on li-reg. > I know that this is a long letter, and hope you do not get the > impression that I am trying to be difficult. PCQ just wants to ensure > that all parties get a fair deal, and are protected from accusations > or complications ( like we faced last year when it came to accounting > for the expenses) later on. Absolutely. I understand. > I assume that you will be addressing these minor issues and am > restarting the IT.COM process here at PCQ. Could you please identify the > coordinator of ILUG-Bangalore ( is that Jessica or is it Biju Chacko or > is it someone else? Perhaps they will elect / appoint a new person, once > they register themselves). I now need to get in touch with this person. The coordinator currently is Biju Chako. > PCQ has tried to be a propagator of Linux in India for many years now - > nothing would please us more than being able to continue this role at > IT.COM 2000. > Once again, thanks for all the help and for understanding and > acomodating our dilema. I'm glad to see things back on track again. I'll address all the issues in the mail ASAP and keep you updated. Thanks! -Arun --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G-- From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 10 18:54:00 2000 Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BB74A0B6 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adsharma@localhost) by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA29248 for li-reg@lists.linux-india.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:51:16 -0700 Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:51:16 -0700 From: Arun Sharma To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: More intros ? Message-ID: <20000910185116.A29232@sharmas.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i X-Archive-Number: 200009/73 Some more ILUGs have come on board after the first round of intros. Could the new guys introduce themselves to the list ? Thanks! -Arun From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Sun Sep 10 21:31:30 2000 Received: from ganwaar.com (unknown [203.94.251.152]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99D34A029; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from raju@localhost) by ganwaar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01912; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:55:56 +0530 From: Raju Mathur MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14780.24275.770258.725071@localhost.localdomain> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:55:55 +0530 (IST) To: Cc: Arun Sharma , linux-delhi@lists.linux-india.org, li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: IT.COM In-Reply-To: <200009070949.AA314704188@cmil.com> References: <200009070949.AA314704188@cmil.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 10) "Capitol Reef" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org X-Archive-Number: 200009/74 Hi KK, Please consider this an endorsement of Arun's earlier message(s) regarding ILUG-Bangalore's interfacing for IT.COM by ILUG-Delhi. I'm CC'ing this message to our list so that no black holes of information remain. Thanks for the continuing support for Linux in India. Regards, -- Raju >>>>> "KK" == Krishna Kumar <" > writes: KK> Dear Arun, KK> First of all, thanks for the flexibility and the confidence. KK> We would gladly accept ILUG Bangalore as representing Linux KK> India, till such time that Linux India discusses and finalises KK> its charter, etc. We do appreciate that that could take time. KK> That said, some minor issues still remain, but they can easily KK> be resolved, now that we have taken this significant step KK> forward. KK> The first is that ILUG Bangalore is as yet not a legal KK> body. So, can ILUG -Bangalore register itself fast? You could KK> do a not -for profit society registration. KK> I believe that ILUG-Bangalore has some apprehensions about KK> registering now, thinking that the Linux community would see KK> this in the wrong light as they could be seen as jumping the KK> registration gun. If you and /or (but preferably and) Thaths KK> ask them to do this, while the LI registration is pending, KK> then that could be handled. The process should not take more KK> than a week. I would be happy to help if required (in my KK> personal capacity, given my previous experience with the KK> Cooperative movement) KK> In my original letter, I had raised the issue of factions, et KK> al. Your mail also has some prominent LUGs missing in KK> endorsing this idea. Delhi, Trivandrum,Cochin (I may seem to KK> be partial to Kerala, but then I come from that part of the KK> country ;-)) and Pune come to mind immediately. KK> Your CCing your message to the lists should cover this KK> problem. KK> But, since we cannot monitor the discussions in all the KK> regional lists, and to avoid possible claims of not being KK> involved, of being short circuited, etc, may I suggest that KK> that the Coordinators from each representative LUG email their KK> own ILUG mailing lists, cc to me and you, stating that this KK> nomination is being made for IT.COM, as LI is not formally KK> structured and registered, and that such a nomination is KK> acceptable. (The fact that the li-reg list is a private list KK> and that all LUG members don't actually know what is being KK> discussed there also weighs in my suggesting this small but KK> important step). KK> I know that this is a long letter, and hope you do not get the KK> impression that I am trying to be difficult. PCQ just wants to KK> ensure that all parties get a fair deal, and are protected KK> from accusations or complications ( like we faced last year KK> when it came to accounting for the expenses) later on. KK> I assume that you will be addressing these minor issues and am KK> restarting the IT.COM process here at PCQ. Could you please KK> identify the coordinator of ILUG-Bangalore ( is that Jessica KK> or is it Biju Chacko or is it someone else? Perhaps they will KK> elect / appoint a new person, once they register KK> themselves). I now need to get in touch with this person. KK> PCQ has tried to be a propagator of Linux in India for many KK> years now - nothing would please us more than being able to KK> continue this role at IT.COM 2000. KK> Once again, thanks for all the help and for understanding and KK> acomodating our dilema. KK> Regards kkkg KK> -------------------- KK> At 03:22 AM 9/7/00, Arun Sharma wrote: Dear KK, KK> It has been brought to our attention that IT.COM is an KK> important event and it would be a shame to lose this KK> opportunity to highlight Linux in such a high profile trade KK> show. KK> We are currently in the second week of a four week schedule to KK> figure out the charter and the administrative details of Linux KK> India on our mailing list. However, we do appreciate the KK> urgency of the matter. We also understand the difficulties you KK> have in justifying the expenses incurred on a local LUG. KK> Therefore, we propose that you (PCQ) consider ILUG Bangalore KK> as the authorised organisation to handle all matters relating KK> to IT.com on behalf of Linux India for this year. We hope KK> that Linux-India will have much to contribute to the Linux KK> presence at IT.com from 2001 onwards. KK> This was passed by an overwhelming majority on the Linux India KK> registration mailing list. KK> Signed by: KK> Arun Sharma Sudhakar "Thaths" Chandrasekharan KK> K. Dakshinamurthy G. Sagar - ILUG Bombay Vaibhav Sharma - ILUG KK> Indore Gurunandan Bhat - ILUG Goa Girish Kamath - ILUG KK> Mangalore Biju Chako - ILUG Bangalore Prabhu Ramachandran - KK> ILUG Chennai Naheed Vora - ILUG Ahmedabad Nikhil - ILUG KK> Hyderabad From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 11 12:23:10 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191624A03B for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 390 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:44:43 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13YZ7i-0000PE-00 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:50:10 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:50:10 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Constitution In-Reply-To: References: <39B44857.B014962C@vsnl.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14781.8222.288422.770840@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/75 hi, Here is my take on the constitution. I have no idea if my thoughts make any sense. Add/subtract from what follows. >>>>> "Gurunandan" == Gurunandan R Bhat writes: Gurunandan> a) Aims of LI LI will aim to do the following (in no particular order): (1) Be a non-profit legal entity that represents all the LUG's of India. (2) Provide an easy way out for LUG's to deal with money transactions as a non-profit org. (3) Act as a general launch pad for activities related to Linux in India. (4) Provide necessary support for the LUG's that represent it. (5) Attempt to solve inter LUG problems by communication/mediation. Structure of LI: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I would like to think of the structure of LI as follows: (1) LI contains LUGs. Something like branches of an organisation. LUG's are branches of LI. (2) Each LUG that is part of LI will have the foll. (a) a representative who is in charge of keeping the LUG in touch with LI. The representative also votes. (b) Some kind of an account managed by LI for it. This is to make things easy for LUG's to handle money I/O. (3) As for now there is no weighted voting. (4) Constitution change allowed if and only if > 2/3rd of the members and their respective LUG's ratify a proposal. LUG will ratify it byu either holding a special meeting, or on the mailing list or on a normal meeting (only folks who attend the meeting can vote. :) (5) LI will handle legal aspects of LUG's. LUG's: ^^^^^^ (1) LUG's are free to do as they please so long as they are not against any of LI's fundamental goals (mentioned above). (2) LUG's that wish to be part of LI in order to benefit from it must register with it and abide by its rules. (3) LUG does not need to become a legal org by itself. LI should handle legalese for it. Gurunandan> b) How and whom by, will LI be managed LI will be managed by its representative LUG's. LI will need to have a competent legal advisor, and an auditor. LI should not, if possible allow a commercial organisation to handle its affairs. However biased this may sound, this I believe will avoid a lot of unnecessary pain. LI will need legal signatories etc. I'd suggest that each LUG have its own signatory and national events require signature of all representatives. But this is a big pain. How about PGP'd messages? Gurunandan> c) What would be the relation between LI and the Gurunandan> various LUGs LUG's represent LI. So... Gurunandan> The last (not a part of the constitution) would have Gurunandan> to be "who will register LI". If I see no drafts in Gurunandan> half a day, I will try to provide a working draft for Gurunandan> your consideration. We really need an auditor/legal advisor. I doubt if any one here is competent to discuss the issues relevant for formalization. Apologies if I am wrong, but if someone competent is here please speak up! :) prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Mon Sep 11 12:33:40 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDDC4A01C for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:33:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 254 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:54:47 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13YZHX-0000PW-00 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 01:00:19 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 01:00:19 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution In-Reply-To: <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org> <20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in> <20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org> <14761.26086.806460.112042@monster.linux.in> <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14781.12404.354025.761033@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/76 hi, >>>>> "Sudhakar" == Sudhakar Chandra writes: Sudhakar> Prabhu Ramachandran proclaimed: >> (1) Why do we need a national level body? >> >> If it is to just keep in touch, no formality is required. We >> can just have a dedicated mailing list. If the need arises >> issues can be settled there. Sudhakar> One overwhelming sentiment that I heard when I visited Sudhakar> some ILUGs in India almost a year ago was that thew LI Sudhakar> mailing lists have too much traffic and that many people Sudhakar> were subscribed to the ILUG m.l. and not LI. I know that and am one of the people who has done just that. What I mean is not have every one in linux subsribed to this contact list. Just a core group who communicates with his/her LUG and keeps in touch. Low volume, specialised list like this one. >> As one member at ILUGC put it, some of us would like to think >> of LI/Local LUG's as clubs of people who share a common passion >> for an open source (put your favourite choice of words here) >> OS. Putting a formal body seems to destroy that spirit. Sudhakar> If a local ILUG thinks that formalizing itself is not Sudhakar> needed, then it should have the freedom to be remain Sudhakar> informal. But, as I have indicated, problems might Sudhakar> arise if / when things have to be coordinated with the Sudhakar> national body. Also keep in mind that if ILUG-C does Sudhakar> not register itself as a formal body, some "rougue" (for Sudhakar> lack of a better word) ILUG-C might be registered by Sudhakar> someone wanting to make a quick buck / have free PR. Is this really possible? prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 12 00:01:53 2000 Received: from blr.vsnl.net.in (blr.vsnl.net.in [202.54.12.6]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5674A0A7 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 23:54:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puma (PPP-174-49.bng.vsnl.net.in [203.197.174.49]) by blr.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA02163 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:17:03 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <000f01c01c86$0f720560$0500a8c0@puma> Reply-To: "Biju Chacko" From: "Biju Chacko" To: References: <39B44857.B014962C@vsnl.com> <14781.8222.288422.770840@monster.linux.in> Subject: Re: Constitution Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:22:41 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Archive-Number: 200009/77 ----- Original Message ----- From: Prabhu Ramachandran > Here is my take on the constitution. I have no idea if my > thoughts make any sense. Add/subtract from what follows. > > >>>>> "Gurunandan" == Gurunandan R Bhat writes: > > Gurunandan> a) Aims of LI > > LI will aim to do the following (in no particular order): > > (1) Be a non-profit legal entity that represents all the LUG's of > India. This is good. > > (2) Provide an easy way out for LUG's to deal with money > transactions as a non-profit org. I'm not sure I understand this. Do you mean that corporates can account for donations by citing LI as a non-profit organisation? That's a good idea, especially for LUGs that do not have legal status. > (3) Act as a general launch pad for activities related to Linux in > India. OK . I think it should be specifically National level activities, though. > (4) Provide necessary support for the LUG's that represent it. > What kind of support ? Financial? I am not comfortable with that. > (5) Attempt to solve inter LUG problems by communication/mediation. > Good point. > > Structure of LI: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > I would like to think of the structure of LI as follows: > > (1) LI contains LUGs. Something like branches of an organisation. > LUG's are branches of LI. Uh-uh. LUG's are constituents of LI. More like members of a club. So we'd say LI is made up of LUGs > > (2) Each LUG that is part of LI will have the foll. Each LUG that is *a member* of LI will have the foll. > > (a) a representative who is in charge of keeping the LUG in touch > with LI. The representative also votes. > > (b) Some kind of an account managed by LI for it. This is to > make things easy for LUG's to handle money I/O. > > (3) As for now there is no weighted voting. > > (4) Constitution change allowed if and only if > 2/3rd of the > members and their respective LUG's ratify a proposal. LUG will > ratify it byu either holding a special meeting, or on the mailing > list or on a normal meeting (only folks who attend the meeting can > vote. :) > > (5) LI will handle legal aspects of LUG's. > Mostly Good. Account/Legal stuff should be optional (if it's needed at all). > > LUG's: > ^^^^^^ > > (1) LUG's are free to do as they please so long as they are not > against any of LI's fundamental goals (mentioned above). > > (2) LUG's that wish to be part of LI in order to benefit from it > must register with it and abide by its rules. What rules? Your structure (which, BTW, I think is pretty good) seems to put most of the onus of operation on the LUGs. So a regulatory aspect for LI seems unnecessary. > (3) LUG does not need to become a legal org by itself. LI should > handle legalese for it. > Yep, this is a good approach. Unfortunately, it will probably become necessary as LUGs grow. > Gurunandan> b) How and whom by, will LI be managed > > LI will be managed by its representative LUG's. > > LI will need to have a competent legal advisor, and an auditor. > > LI should not, if possible allow a commercial organisation to handle > its affairs. However biased this may sound, this I believe will avoid > a lot of unnecessary pain. Absolutely unbiased view! As a non-profit org LI *must not* allow a commercial org to have any administrative influence. Let's not confuse co-operation with commercial orgs with handling affairs. > > LI will need legal signatories etc. I'd suggest that each LUG have > its own signatory and national events require signature of all > representatives. But this is a big pain. How about PGP'd messages? I have doubts on the legality of PGP > > Gurunandan> c) What would be the relation between LI and the > Gurunandan> various LUGs > > LUG's represent LI. So... and visa versa > > Gurunandan> The last (not a part of the constitution) would have > Gurunandan> to be "who will register LI". If I see no drafts in > Gurunandan> half a day, I will try to provide a working draft for > Gurunandan> your consideration. > > We really need an auditor/legal advisor. I doubt if any one > here is competent to discuss the issues relevant for formalization. > Apologies if I am wrong, but if someone competent is here please speak > up! :) Amen! > > prabhu > > --------------------------------------- > Please respect the privacy of this list. Biju From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 12 09:00:10 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.191]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97A8D4A02B for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02202 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:00:28 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:00:28 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) In-Reply-To: <14781.8222.288422.770840@monster.linux.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/78 OK, Here are some suggestions on the broad structure for LI. I look forward to your comments and suggestions. First let me get to the all important relation between the LUGs and LI. 1) LI is an organisation that exists to give shape to the aspirations of the LUGs at the national level. The LUGs guide LI through their coordinators who form the core group that manages LI. 2) LI must in no way hold any "power" over the LUGs. We need to evolve guidelines/criteria to decide "the one true LUG for every city" and the "the one true coordinator" for each LUG. Considering that Thaths has constructed this mailing list without much ambiguity should give us hope that this is not difficult. 3) The LUGs and LI work together coordinate and work together on a per-programme basis. If the individual LUGs sense an opportunity, and believe that they (the programme) might benefit from nation-wide exposure/participation, they approach LI (through their coordinator). LI then gives a call to other LUGs and coordinates. IF LI sees an opportunity, it notifies all LUGs and calls for cooperation. 4) All coordinators of LUGs get automatic membership to the core group of LI. A core group member automatically lays down his position when his LUG appoints a new coordinator, who then automatically joins the core. A coordinator is free to abstain from exercising this privilege (membership of the governing council) , if her LUG sees no benefit in their alignment with LI and informs her accordingly. 5) The only issue on which the LUGs yield to LI is that LI gets to register with Linux International. That is the first and last concession that the LUGs make to LI. After that the collective wisdom of the individual LUG coordinators shall guide LI In times that the LUGs do not need any help/cooperation from the LI, it will have lots of things to do. a) Administer mailing lists. b) Maintain and Update Website. b) Keep eyes and ears open to opportunities of a) Organising national events b) Correcting misconceptions about Linux in the national press with joint statements on behalf of the LUGs. c) Organise national events to highlight Linux and its community of users d) Organise a annual Linux Convention and User Meet. Now a few thoughts on the functioning of LI: First of all, LI could be registered by the coordinators of LUGs currently extant. Coordinators of LUGs that will be formed in the future, will of course not be Registrars, but will share equal power and responsibility as the original Registrars if and when they come aboard. All coordinators are equal, all conflicts resolved by a referendum among the coordinators. Here are some functionaries of LI: 1. Managers for (Term 1 year): a) Public Relations and Awareness Management (Mailing List management, Web site management, Press Releases, Opportunity identification) b) Programmes and Event Coordination and Inter-LUG affairs (National Linux related event, participation and organisation) c) Resource Mobilisation (Fund raising, Library management) d) Research and Development (Student events, Scholarships, Geek stuff) I had earlier put in posts like President, Secretary, Treasurer etc, but the whole thing sounded so pompous that I quickly changed my mind. Better to keep it all low key ;) What we can (must) do is divide up responsibilities and believe in collective responsibility. Heres the financial part: LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth (capital). On the other hand it should strive to raise monies for specific programmes and spend them exactly on those programmes. In short, between two programmes, LI should be as broke as the Ten Commandments. Comments? Regards, Guru From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 12 10:46:17 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-47.netscape.com [205.217.237.47]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA29C4A026 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e8CH0nu11807 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:03:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0SA7601.BE5 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:06:42 -0700 Message-ID: <39BE62A2.45C7897B@netscape.com> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:06:42 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/79 "Gurunandan R. Bhat" proclaimed: > OK, Here are some suggestions on the broad structure for LI. I look > forward to your comments and suggestions. Thanks for writing these thoughts up, Guru. > 2) LI must in no way hold any "power" over the LUGs. We need to > evolve guidelines/criteria to decide "the one true LUG for every city" > and the "the one true coordinator" for each LUG. Considering that > Thaths has constructed this mailing list without much ambiguity should > give us hope that this is not difficult. How about the following guidelines (apropriately): "Every new LUG wanting to send its coordinator to LI will send an email to LI putting forth the name of the coordinator. This proposal has to be seconded by /at least/ 3 other people from the same LUG. Alternatively, existing coordinators of LI could also nominate coordinators of new LUGs (which they get to know of through their contacts) into LI." When we write this into the constitution, we have to make sure that we have some kind of democratic way of solving exceptions (like two LUGs claiming to be The True LUG of city X). Perhaps by voting. > 4) All coordinators of LUGs get automatic membership to the core group > of LI. A core group member automatically lays down his position when > his LUG appoints a new coordinator, who then automatically joins the > core. A coordinator is free to abstain from exercising this privilege > (membership of the governing council) , if her LUG sees no benefit in > their alignment with LI and informs her accordingly. Should the coordinator of a LUG also be that LUG's representative in LI? Their plate is already full with all the stuff they have to do for their LUG. Maybe we should allow the coordinator and the LUG's representative in LI to be different people. Sort of like an MP not being a Chief Minister in a state's government. > Here are some functionaries of LI: > > 1. Managers for (Term 1 year): > > a) Public Relations and Awareness Management (Mailing List > management, Web site management, Press Releases, Opportunity > identification) > b) Programmes and Event Coordination and Inter-LUG affairs > (National Linux related event, participation and organisation) > c) Resource Mobilisation (Fund raising, Library management) > d) Research and Development (Student events, Scholarships, Geek > stuff) > > I had earlier put in posts like President, Secretary, Treasurer etc, > but the whole thing sounded so pompous that I quickly changed my > mind. Better to keep it all low key ;) What we can (must) do is divide > up responsibilities and believe in collective responsibility. Perhaps it makes sense to divide the responsibilities between two groups - operational (Listadmin, Webmaster etc.) and organizational (fund raising, event coordination etc.) We also need to note that the operational or organizational person can, and in fact should, enlist the help of volunteers to help them out. > LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or > membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth > (capital). On the other hand it should strive to raise monies for > specific programmes and spend them exactly on those programmes. In > short, between two programmes, LI should be as broke as the Ten > Commandments. Financial planning is a strange thing. I predict that at the end of some event there is bound to be some extra monies in the kitty. We could perhaps think up of ways of using up all these monies and converting them into goods (advertisements in newspapers / magazines, t-shirts, CDs etc.) Thaths -- "Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 12 11:57:08 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.172]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C2BB4A027 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03597 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 00:23:57 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 00:23:57 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) In-Reply-To: <39BE62A2.45C7897B@netscape.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/80 On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Sudhakar Chandra wrote: > "Gurunandan R. Bhat" proclaimed: > > "Every new LUG wanting to send its coordinator to LI will send an > email to LI putting forth the name of the coordinator. This proposal > has to be seconded by /at least/ 3 other people from the same LUG. > Alternatively, existing coordinators of LI could also nominate > coordinators of new LUGs (which they get to know of through their > contacts) into LI." Consider this too: LI writes to the respective LUGs mailing list saying --- "X claims to be the coordinator of your LUG and wishes to be a member of the LI core. Does anyone have objections". If more than y% objections arrive, we ask the list to nominate a new member. > When we write this into the constitution, we have to make sure that we have > some kind of democratic way of solving exceptions (like two LUGs claiming > to be The True LUG of city X). Perhaps by voting. I could not think of any graceful way of doing this, yet. But will think some more. > Should the coordinator of a LUG also be that LUG's representative in LI? Not neccessarily. The LUG is free to nominate a representative who is not a coordinator. Of course he needs to be authenrticated by his LUG by one of the above procedures. > > a) Public Relations and Awareness Management (Mailing List > > management, Web site management, Press Releases, Opportunity > > identification) > > b) Programmes and Event Coordination and Inter-LUG affairs > > (National Linux related event, participation and organisation) > > c) Resource Mobilisation (Fund raising, Library management) > > d) Research and Development (Student events, Scholarships, Geek > > stuff) > > > Perhaps it makes sense to divide the responsibilities between two groups - > operational (Listadmin, Webmaster etc.) and organizational (fund raising, > event coordination etc.) I see no harm in that. Might make administration easy. > We also need to note that the operational or organizational person > can, and in fact should, enlist the help of volunteers to help them > out. Of course. > > LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or > > membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth > > (capital). On the other hand it should strive to raise monies for > > specific programmes and spend them exactly on those programmes. In > > short, between two programmes, LI should be as broke as the Ten > > Commandments. > > Financial planning is a strange thing. I predict that at the end of some > event there is bound to be some extra monies in the kitty. We could > perhaps think up of ways of using up all these monies and converting them > into goods (advertisements in newspapers / magazines, t-shirts, CDs etc.) Sure as long as no wealth is created and all spendings are properly accounted and justified. Wealth is the root cause..... We could always return the money to the sponsor.. ....Oh! forget it ;) Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Tue Sep 12 20:28:34 2000 Received: from blr.vsnl.net.in (blr.vsnl.net.in [202.54.12.6]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C294A033 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from darkstar.moria (PPP-180-164.bng.vsnl.net.in [203.197.180.164]) by blr.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA22125 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:51:21 +0530 (IST) Received: by darkstar.moria (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2A3ADC329; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:55:57 +0530 (IST) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:55:56 +0530 From: Biju Chacko To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) Message-ID: <20000913085556.A4422@darkstar.moria> Reply-To: Biju Chacko Mail-Followup-To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org References: <14781.8222.288422.770840@monster.linux.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from grbhat@softhome.net on Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 09:00:28PM +0530 Organization: Systems Plus Pvt Ltd. X-Archive-Number: 200009/81 Detailed comments later. Overall seems to be good. --- On 12/09/00 21:00 +0530, Gurunandan R. Bhat wrote: > OK, Here are some suggestions on the broad structure for LI. I look > forward to your comments and suggestions. > > Here are some functionaries of LI: > > 1. Managers for (Term 1 year): > > a) Public Relations and Awareness Management (Mailing List > management, Web site management, Press Releases, Opportunity > identification) > b) Programmes and Event Coordination and Inter-LUG affairs > (National Linux related event, participation and organisation) > c) Resource Mobilisation (Fund raising, Library management) > d) Research and Development (Student events, Scholarships, Geek > stuff) > > I had earlier put in posts like President, Secretary, Treasurer etc, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Aren't those posts a legal requirement ? Biju From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 13 00:25:32 2000 Received: from citpl.compuwave.co.in (unknown [202.54.64.162]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82EFF4A178 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 00:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberwaveindia.com ([203.197.147.34]) by citpl.compuwave.co.in (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id 619 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:46:31 +0530 Received: from prabhu by cyberwaveindia.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 13Z6rp-0004zV-00 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:52:01 +0530 From: Prabhu Ramachandran MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:52:01 +0530 (IST) To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) In-Reply-To: References: <14781.8222.288422.770840@monster.linux.in> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14783.10229.863640.530802@monster.linux.in> X-Archive-Number: 200009/82 hi, This message is provocative with purpose. I realize that I run the risk of getting a bad reputation. :) Your proposal and Thaths suggestions sound excellent. I have one crib. There were folks who said that they hadn't contributed to the discussion earlier cos there were no quality posts. Well, I dont think you'd find more constructive posts that the last three. :) The structure you have presented sort of tallies with what I had posted. So the points I make will mostly be minor. >>>>> "Gurunandan" == Gurunandan R Bhat writes: Gurunandan> 4) All coordinators of LUGs get automatic membership Gurunandan> to the core group of LI. A core group member Gurunandan> automatically lays down his position when his LUG Gurunandan> appoints a new coordinator, who then automatically Gurunandan> joins the core. A coordinator is free to abstain from Gurunandan> exercising this privilege (membership of the governing Gurunandan> council) , if her LUG sees no benefit in their Gurunandan> alignment with LI and informs her accordingly. This is fine. But what does the co-ordinator get out of it? As Thaths mentioned usu. co-ordinators are kind of overloaded. At least at ilugc everyone who suggested a representative for li-reg voted for someone else! So _normally_, folks are not interested in taking _any_ responsibility. Besides some of them are genuinely busy. We need to clearly understand the duties of a co-ordinator and his LI work load. And it is a good idea to allow for someone different from the co-ordinator to represent the lug. Gurunandan> 5) The only issue on which the LUGs yield to LI is Gurunandan> that LI gets to register with Linux Gurunandan> International. That is the first and last concession Gurunandan> that the LUGs make to LI. After that the collective Gurunandan> wisdom of the individual LUG coordinators shall guide Gurunandan> LI Sounds good. Gurunandan> a) Administer mailing lists. Gurunandan> b) Maintain and Update Website. Gurunandan> b) Keep eyes and ears open to opportunities of Gurunandan> a) Organising national events Gurunandan> b) Correcting misconceptions about Linux in Gurunandan> the national press with joint statements on behalf of Gurunandan> the LUGs. Gurunandan> c) Organise national events to highlight Linux Gurunandan> and its community of users Gurunandan> d) Organise a annual Linux Convention and User Gurunandan> Meet. this is a truly tough one. We need to find relatively free, trusted, dedicated volunteers. Each lug already has almost all of its members doing their bit... Gurunandan> Now a few thoughts on the functioning of LI: Gurunandan> Here are some functionaries of LI: Gurunandan> 1. Managers for (Term 1 year): Gurunandan> a) Public Relations and Awareness Management Gurunandan> (Mailing List management, Web site management, Press Gurunandan> Releases, Opportunity identification) b) Programmes Gurunandan> and Event Coordination and Inter-LUG affairs (National Gurunandan> Linux related event, participation and organisation) Gurunandan> c) Resource Mobilisation (Fund raising, Library Gurunandan> management) d) Research and Development (Student Gurunandan> events, Scholarships, Geek stuff) This sounds big and hard. :( Gurunandan> I had earlier put in posts like President, Secretary, Gurunandan> Treasurer etc, but the whole thing sounded so pompous Gurunandan> that I quickly changed my mind. Better to keep it all Gurunandan> low key ;) What we can (must) do is divide up Gurunandan> responsibilities and believe in collective Gurunandan> responsibility. Agreed and find people to take up the respinsibilities. :) Gurunandan> Heres the financial part: Gurunandan> LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or Gurunandan> donations or membership dues, anything) in a manner Gurunandan> that would create wealth (capital). On the other hand Gurunandan> it should strive to raise monies for specific Gurunandan> programmes and spend them exactly on those Gurunandan> programmes. In short, between two programmes, LI Gurunandan> should be as broke as the Ten Commandments. Gurunandan> Comments? I agree with Thaths and your ideas. Sounds really good. Now we are really cracking. :) Apologies if I stepped on other people's toes, but we need to discuss this issue. Maybe a vote on the general structure is in order? prabhu From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 13 02:47:51 2000 Received: from railmalem.caltiger.com (unknown [202.86.136.23]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE404A229 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debianut.ekmnet.in by railmalem.caltiger.com (8.9.3/1.1.4.2/07Aug00-0105PM) id PAA0000005975; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 15:12:10 +0530 (IST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=vsnl.com) by debianut.ekmnet.in with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 13Z93o-0000Qd-00 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 15:12:32 +0530 Message-ID: <39BF4C01.FB35E5F6@vsnl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 15:12:25 +0530 From: Raghavendra Bhat Organization: Power of the GNU http://www.gnu.org/ X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18pre6 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/83 {Wondering if this is true or is it a daydream ?] "Gurunandan R. Bhat" is dead on target: > LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or > membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth > (capital). On the other hand it should strive to raise monies for > specific programmes and spend them exactly on those programmes. In > short, between two programmes, LI should be as broke as the Ten > Commandments. > > Comments? > One of the best ideas put forward in these discussions. I wholly second these. But is it going to stick, Guru ? People/Baby-LUGs who/which raise/get money will be reluctant to let go. Politics for power/pelf are going to happen if we do not adhere to these guidelines strictly as suggested. Hats off to this workable and great idea. -- ragOO, VU2RGU Keeping the Air-Waves FREE.....Amateur Radio Keeping the W W W FREE..Debian GNU/Linux From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 13 08:45:23 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.227]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801174A010 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA00965 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 21:13:17 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 21:13:17 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) In-Reply-To: <14783.10229.863640.530802@monster.linux.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/84 On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > So _normally_, folks are not interested in taking _any_ > responsibility. Normally yes. But just as you took responsibility to join this list and contribute to the discussion inspite of the demands normally made on a graduate student, let us hope someone from your LUG does the same. > And it is a good idea to allow for someone different from the > co-ordinator to represent the lug. I agree with you and Thaths about this. > Maybe a vote on the general structure is in order? To soon, IMHO. Lets get a proper draft in place. If we do our job well, we might not even need to take a vote. There are still some issues left. We still need to answer the big questions: What constitutes a LUG? I am preparing a draft for your collective consideration and will post it soon Regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 13 08:45:32 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.227]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B4254A010 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:45:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00957 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:56:48 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:56:47 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) In-Reply-To: <39BF4C01.FB35E5F6@vsnl.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/85 On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Raghavendra Bhat wrote: > "Gurunandan R. Bhat" is dead on target: > > > > LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or > > membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth > > (capital). > But is it going to stick, Guru ? It might, if you, me and our friends resist all attempts at getting it unstuck. But no promises ;) I am aware that each one of us is imperfect in one or other way. But I am counting on other people's perfect parts to cover up my own imperfections. You can count on me to do the same. That's our only chance at building perfect organisations. > People/Baby-LUGs who/which raise/get money will be reluctant to let > go. The LUGs will do what they will. But none of that should be allowed to taint LI. Currently, we do not have the mandate to decide on the conduct of individual LUGs and I hope we never have occasion to. That is the duty of the members of the individual LUGs. > Politics for power/pelf are going to happen if we do not adhere to > these guidelines strictly as suggested. Let us keep faith that the representatives our LUGs will send to LI will not go against the Constitution. Our job is easier than theirs is going to be. Regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 13 09:26:14 2000 Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-47.netscape.com [205.217.237.47]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFB7A4A1F7 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from judge.mcom.com (judge.mcom.com [205.217.237.53]) by netscape.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e8DGHCu01356 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netscape.com ([208.12.45.34]) by judge.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id G0U2UZ02.NA0 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:23:23 -0700 Message-ID: <39BFA9FA.9EDB7012@netscape.com> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:23:22 -0700 From: Sudhakar Chandra Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75b1 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) References: <39BF4C01.FB35E5F6@vsnl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200009/86 Raghavendra Bhat proclaimed: > {Wondering if this is true or is it a daydream ?] Well. All the dreams I've been having, not related to li-reg I must hasten to add, have been nightmares. ;-) > "Gurunandan R. Bhat" is dead on target: > > LI should not raise funds (either from sponsorships or donations or > > membership dues, anything) in a manner that would create wealth > > (capital). On the other hand it should strive to raise monies for > > specific programmes and spend them exactly on those programmes. In > > short, between two programmes, LI should be as broke as the Ten > > Commandments. > One of the best ideas put forward in these discussions. I wholly > second these. But is it going to stick, Guru ? The nice thing about LI will be its democracy. Since reps from all over the country are going to be part of it, I think there is a much better chance of making it stick. > People/Baby-LUGs > who/which raise/get money will be reluctant to let go. Politics > for power/pelf are going to happen if we do not adhere to these > guidelines strictly as suggested. Honeslty, some of the politics that we see around us is more because of lack or breakdown of communications and not genuine intent to politick. The national representative nature of LI will ensure, IMO, good communications. Thaths -- Bart: I don't want to take drugs. Homer: Sure you do. All your favorite stars abuse drugs. Brett Butler, Tim Allen ... Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 14 01:38:52 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78A2A4A047 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp116-125.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.116.125]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id OAA21448 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:44:25 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <05ab01c01e27$6d4e9c00$7374c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org><20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in><20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org><14761.26086.806460.112042@monster.linux.in><39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> <14781.12404.354025.761033@monster.linux.in> Subject: On LI Fund management Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:10:22 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/87 Hi all, I appreciate Guru's interesting suggestion that in between events LI should have no monies in its kitty... it would be quite an ideal situation... but is it practical? Consider this for a moment... what happens to the money that may be leftover in the LI kitty after any such fund-raising effort for any event? How do we spend this money? on what? Please don't suggest that we handover the remainder to the sponser... it would be impractical and an accounting nightmare... e.g an event has more than 1 sponsor funding the event? IMO, its far better to use this money to buildup long-term funds... that can be used in raising user-awareness, propaganda/publicity campaigns in a structured manner. Every organisation of every nature requires funds for long term functioning. Sure, we are different in many ways than others, but even we can't do without money for various resources and requirements... whether it is subscription-based, fee-based, voluntary contribution based or sponsorships... the bottom-line is that we need funds. While Guru's ad-hoc fund-raising idea sounds simple and ideal on the face value, IMHO it is not entirely practical. BTW, I am all for us practising complete caution, but against becoming a bunch of "Doubting Thomas"es. We seem to be drifting on occassions to doubt everyone's motives/intent.... The majority of us are here with honest motives. And since we are sticking to the democratic principles I am sure we can overcome/overrule representative with any other "interests". --indra From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 14 02:16:06 2000 Received: from blr.vsnl.net.in (blr.vsnl.net.in [202.54.12.6]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B904A032 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 02:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puma.yahoo.com (PPP-178-244.bng.vsnl.net.in [203.197.178.244]) by blr.vsnl.net.in (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA21506 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:38:45 +0530 (IST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.0.20000914143146.00ad3c00@cheetah> X-Sender: biju_chacko#pop.mail.yahoo.com@cheetah X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 14:44:34 +0530 To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org From: Biju Chacko Subject: Re: On LI Fund management In-Reply-To: <05ab01c01e27$6d4e9c00$7374c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org> <20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in> <20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org> <14761.26086.806460.112042@monster.linux.in> <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> <14781.12404.354025.761033@monster.linux.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200009/88 At 02:10 PM 14/09/00, you wrote: >IMO, its far better to use this money to buildup long-term funds... that >can be used in raising user-awareness, propaganda/publicity campaigns in a >structured manner. Every organisation of every nature requires funds for >long term functioning. Sure, we are different in many ways than others, >but even we can't do without money for various resources and >requirements... whether it is subscription-based, fee-based, voluntary >contribution based or sponsorships... the bottom-line is that we need >funds. While Guru's ad-hoc fund-raising idea sounds simple and ideal on >the face value, IMHO it is not entirely practical. > >BTW, I am all for us practising complete caution, but against becoming a >bunch of "Doubting Thomas"es. We seem to be drifting on occassions to >doubt everyone's motives/intent.... The majority of us are here with >honest motives. And since we are sticking to the democratic principles I >am sure we can overcome/overrule representative with any other "interests". I think Prabhu had mentioned something about auditors. I think requiring an annual external audit would keep things open and above-board. As I see it, the only way of avoiding the 'doubts' caused by money is by not allowing them to breed. Either eliminate the money all together or make sure it's handling is fully transparent. Frankly, I am ambivalent on this and would like to see more discussion. Biju From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 14 10:38:39 2000 Received: from cal.vsnl.net.in (cal.vsnl.net.in [202.54.9.25]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B07C49F5F for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from indradg (ppp116-85.pppcal.vsnl.net.in [203.197.116.85]) by cal.vsnl.net.in (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id XAA12498 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:44:10 +0530 (IST) Message-ID: <001601c01e72$d403d5a0$5574c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> From: "Indranil Das Gupta" To: References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org> <20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in> <20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org> <14761.26086.806460.112042@monster.linux.in> <39B7C6C8.AA2279B4@netscape.com> <14781.12404.354025.761033@monster.linux.in> <4.3.2.7.0.20000914143146.00ad3c00@cheetah> Subject: Re: On LI Fund management Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:10:08 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Archive-Number: 200009/89 Hi, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Biju Chacko" To: Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [LI-Reg] On LI Fund management > >BTW, I am all for us practising complete caution, but against becoming a > >bunch of "Doubting Thomas"es. We seem to be drifting on occassions to > >doubt everyone's motives/intent.... The majority of us are here with > >honest motives. And since we are sticking to the democratic principles I > >am sure we can overcome/overrule representative with any other "interests". > annual external audit would keep things open and above-board. As I see it, > the only way of avoiding the 'doubts' caused by money is by not allowing > them to breed. Right! A external audit would be essential, however, despite my lack of knowledge abt auditors, I believe they charge a certain amount for their professional fees. I don't think we can find any sponsor to foot *that* bill ;-) So if we are broke between events that LI participates (as suggested by Guru and others) how as do we pay the auditors? Your thoughts on this? > Either eliminate the money all together or make sure it's > handling is fully transparent. --indra. From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 14 11:30:13 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.244]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB614A16B for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA02893 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:57:31 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:57:30 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: On LI Fund management In-Reply-To: <05ab01c01e27$6d4e9c00$7374c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/90 On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: > I appreciate Guru's interesting suggestion that in between events LI > should have no monies in its kitty... it would be quite an ideal > situation... but is it practical? Now *this* is where I feel we are losing sight of the real objectives before our list. Please permit me to explain: [Reluctantly climbs the Soap-box...] I have no doubt that all of us would agree on one point: that our job here is to draw up the constitution of an organisation, befitting the concepts of an OS we all have come to admire and love. Like fans of a certain Tomato Ketchup - we think different. We are people who at different points in their careers chose to follow an "impractical" dream of a nineteen year old CS student. The LUGs have sent us here to represent, articulate and embody this difference into the organisation that we are charged to birth. I may sound presumptious, but let me state this: We are here today, because we think differently, because *each* one of us took a conscious decision to be *different*, some at considerable cost to our professional lives. [Senses boredom in audience, and begins to descend...] I am guided here by a statement made by a friend who was explaining to me the difference between a LUG and LI: "A federation of organisations should play the role of a Tour Guide in a Gallery or a technical exhibition. People will come to this tour guide because he is stands at the entrance advertising his existence and services, which consist solely of guiding the visitor to the exhibits (the individual organisations that make the federation) and providing information about them. The quality and value of the exhibits (the organisations, not the federation) will be their own. The tour-guide should have no authority or ownership over the exhibits." Nothing more, and more importantly, nothing *less*. > what happens to the money that may be leftover in the LI kitty after > any such fund-raising effort for any event? How do we spend this > money? on what? As Thaths has suggested: CDs, T-shirts and Badges for distribution at the next event, or as gifts to the LUGs for onward distribution. If nothing else is available, one could consider gifting the monies to charitable organisations - that would generate goodwill both with the original sponsor as well as with the rest of the world, letting them see the Linux community in an entirely different light. Anything to prevent LI from becoming a fat capitalist cash-cow with a potential to dictate to the poor LUGs who do all the hard work. > Please don't suggest that we handover the remainder to the sponser... > it would be impractical and an accounting nightmare No - that was only to scare you into spending it all ;) But seriously, look at it this way. If our planning is good, we know exactly how much an event would cost. If we know how much it costs, we stop when we have raised enough. > IMO, its far better to use this money to buildup long-term funds... > that can be used in raising user-awareness, propaganda/publicity > campaigns in a structured manner. Remember, we are here because of our LUGs - they are the *only* reason for LI's existence. No LUGs, No LI. The LUGs came first. Given that, all I ask is that we raise money in a need-based, structured manner, and spend it the same way. I am not scared of capital. I even seek it out, just as the LUGs are free to do (and some do). All I worry about is the possibility that with all the floating cash (raised, saved and accounted for perfectly) some day, LI would actually set the agenda for the LUGs and not the other way round. Me, I just want to be a poor old tour-guide. I want my exhibits to live and thrive long after I am gone. After all they are free to hire a new guide to show them off at their best. > bottom-line is that we need funds. Sure. Not capital and wealth. Not power and pelf. > While Guru's ad-hoc fund-raising idea sounds simple and ideal on the > face value, IMHO it is not entirely practical. It is not ad-hoc. It is in fact extremely careful and demands perfect planning. We plan for and raise exactly what we need. That is, if LI is to raise funds at all, which I do not really think is necessary. > BTW, I am all for us practising complete caution, but against becoming > a bunch of "Doubting Thomas"es. We seem to be drifting on occassions > to doubt everyone's motives/intent.... The majority of us are here > with honest motives. Without doubt, Indranil. Do you think, I would hang around on this list if I believed otherwise? I have no problems with capital generated by the *LUGs*. I would even admire the foresight of LUGs like Delhi who have explicitly incorporated and planned for this possibility into their MOA, or LUGs like Bangalore that have carefully balanced the need for sponsorship without finger-pointing or accusations of wrong-doing. I have no doubt that LUGs like these would spend and account their wealth in the most appropriate manner. In fact, I have not heard of a single instance of mis-appropriation of funds at any LUG. Allow me the liberty of an example of what I am talking about: I remember the look of horror on Jessica Prabhakar's (ILUG-Bangalore Coordinator) face after one meet in Bangalore that I attended. She realised that they actually had Rs.45 (or some amount like that) left over after settling dues for the meet. Apparently this was a "not done" thing at ILUG-Bangalore, so the money was quickly distributed as additional tips to the waiters. Yet that LUG is incredibly big and active, and a lot of money is asked for (off sponsors) and spent to the benefit of the LUG and the community, all for the good of Linux. We have similar examples in Delhi, Calcutta and Mumbai that I am aware of, and I am sure all the other LUGs operate in a self-sufficient and planned manner. > And since we are sticking to the democratic principles I am sure we > can overcome/overrule representative with any other "interests". But who will overrule LI itself, if it begins to bully the LUGs with all that wealth. Think about *that*. LI does not need money to build wealth - the LUGs are its wealth. If LI needs money for a particular situation, it can always ask the LUGs. If LI does a good job, no LUG would grudge the tour guide his dues. The principle is simple: If at all, financial transactions should place LI in the role of a conduit, not as an accumulator. In this way, there can never be scope for accusations that are almost unavoidable when it comes to money. And after all, let's not lose sight of the fact that Linux itself grew to what it is today - without generating or accumulating money. With warm regards, Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Thu Sep 14 11:49:59 2000 Received: from suman.greenfields.universe (unknown [210.212.161.244]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B35764A15A for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grbhat@localhost) by suman.greenfields.universe (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02954 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:19:13 +0530 X-Authentication-Warning: suman.greenfields.universe: grbhat owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:19:13 +0530 (IST) From: "Gurunandan R. Bhat" X-Sender: grbhat@suman.greenfields.universe To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: On LI Fund management In-Reply-To: <001601c01e72$d403d5a0$5574c5cb@cal.vsnl.net.in> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200009/91 On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Indranil Das Gupta wrote: > Right! A external audit would be essential, however, despite my lack > of knowledge abt auditors, I believe they charge a certain amount for > their professional fees. I don't think we can find any sponsor to foot > *that* bill ;-) So if we are broke between events that LI participates > (as suggested by Guru and others) how as do we pay the auditors? Professional all over the world, give their time and talents freely to furthering the cause of Linux. Finding one such professional auditor should be the very least of our problems. The Goa LUG has among its members two (pick one!) professional accredited CAs who would gladly give their services to do the honours. Gurunandan From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Fri Sep 15 07:47:07 2000 Received: from smtp1.mail.yahoo.com (smtp1.mail.yahoo.com [128.11.69.60]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 40CFE4A11C for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 07:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO vaibhav) (61.11.12.1) by smtp.mail.vip.suc.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2000 18:47:37 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <010301c01db3$28e631a0$010c0b3d@vaibhav> From: "VaibhaV Sharma" To: References: Subject: Re: yacc v0.1 (Yet Another Constitution Candidate) Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:17:50 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 X-Archive-Number: 200009/92 > > When we write this into the constitution, we have to make sure that we have > > some kind of democratic way of solving exceptions (like two LUGs claiming > > to be The True LUG of city X). Perhaps by voting. > > I could not think of any graceful way of doing this, yet. But will think > some more. > Why not ask the two claiming LUG's to form ONE BIG group and then nominate one representative, and the main LI body does not recognise any of those individual groups until they agree to be one. VaibhaV Indore _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From li-reg-owner@lists.linux-india.org Wed Sep 20 11:19:08 2000 Received: from alexander (unknown [202.160.239.105]) by www.aunet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866D94A034 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from vrr@localhost) by alexander (8.10.2/8.10.2) id e8KIAHX01711; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:40:17 +0530 Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:40:17 +0530 Message-Id: <200009201810.e8KIAHX01711@alexander> X-Authentication-Warning: alexander: vrr set sender to raghuram@mailandnews.com using -f From: nikhilwiz@yahoo.com To: li-reg@lists.linux-india.org Subject: Re: On LI Fund Management Reply-To: raghuram@linuxfreak.com X-Archive-Number: 200009/93 Hi! First, I am Raghuram Vijapurapu here from ILUGHYD. I am mailing this on behalf of ILUGHYD, as our Rep Nikhil is busy with his exams and has requested me to mail. Hope you understand :-). I agree with most of the view points made by you in the previous mail, but I have some suggestions to make. I think having a zero balance is better in all respects, as we don't have to worry about [what we have to do with the money/who will manage the money] and do something more constructive. We at ILUGHYD have conducted 2 events this year with no money transactions done by any of we individual members, most of the Major money transactions were done by the sponsor himself. For the first one, CyberExpo2000, PCQ had sponsored the stall. Then for the second one, ITEXPO2000, Margadarshi Chit Funds (The first Complete Linux based Company in Hyderabad) had sponsored the stall. But the small little costs which were borne by the active members of the group might too little to talk about. My suggestion why don't you contribute the left over money which you might have to fund any Open Source projects, or start an All Indian Open Source Project which can help all Indians in some way or the other (eg: An Indianised Linux). Regards, Raghuram Vijapurapu -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Raghuram Vijapurapu] [raghuram@linuxfreak.com] [ICQ# 58896013] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------