Candidate Q&A - List of Questions

[Eric Anholt]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:31:16 +0100, Matthias Hopf <mhopf at suse.de> wrote:
>  1) In the last year, the membership gained a lot more insight in the activities
>     of the board. What is your opinion on this new-gained transparency? Do you
>     see options for improvement?

I'm glad to finally have the transparency we'd agreed we all wanted.  In
particular, the open IRC meetings have been going well.

>  2) In the past, X.org financials have been dealt with in a less than optimal
>     way, but in the last year a lot of effort has been put into creating solid
>     financial records for the last 5 years, so that incorporation can happen.
>     This work is still underway. What is your opinion about this, where do you
>     see room for improvement?

More transparency is good.  Everything to do with financials is pain,
thuogh, and that's not an reflection of the board as much as the banking
system we have.

>  3) As stated in the X.org Foundation bylaws, only a maximum of 2 of the 8 board
>     seats can be taken by employees of the same company. In the past there was a
>     situation where there were more than two of the same company on the board,
>     after some board member changed affiliation. What is your opinion about
>     this, how would you prefer to resolve such a situation?

Just the same as before when it happened: We take the top-ranked
candidate for the seat.  Alan suggested that we up the number from 2 to
3, so as not to eliminate candidates that care enough to contribute to
the board just because they're employed by one of the larger X.Org
contributors.  I'm neutral on this -- it seems like a good thing to do
for the X.Org board, since it doesn't involve itself in technical
direction at all, but it means that I would have less excuse for not
running at some point.

>  4) What is your opinion about the past and the current X.org board elections.
>     Do you have any suggestions for improvement?

The elections system is fine.

>  5) This years X.org conference was held in Toulouse, France. Did you have the
>     chance to visit this, or any previous conferences? For 2011 one proposal was
>     already made to hold the conference in Chicago.
>     Opinions/Suggestions/Proposals?

Couldn't do the last one due to a conflicting event.  XDS/XDC have been
useful conferences for setting technical direction and improving
communication.

>  6) A big chunk of spending goes to travel sponsorship. When he learned about
>     the practices of the more recent years, the current treasurer voiced that,
>     when the X.org foundation was formed, travel was usually not sponsored for
>     those gainfully employed to work on X.org related topics. What is your
>     opinion on this?

It's more important to get our contributors together to talk than to
point fingers at their current employers for being cheap.

>  7) Now, a topic quite close to the heart of the author of this questionnaire:
>     FOSDEM. 4-5000 free software users and developers over a weekend in winter,
>     join up in the center of Europe. X.org used to have a hugely popular
>     Developers Room there. But the interest from the X.org community has
>     dwindled now. Why do you think this is so? Should this be different? Do you
>     have any suggestions?

I was made unwelcome by the organizer of the FOSDEM dev room, and would
probably not bother with it again.  FOSDEM is an excellent conference,
though, which I would attend again.

>  8) The topics of an X.org trademark and a new X.org logo have been talked about
>     since the formation of the current X.org foundation. Are these really
>     important topics for the X.org board? What is your opinion, do you have any
>     suggestions?

No, they are not important topics for the board in my opinion.

>  9) Coordinating Google Summer of Code is another initiative supported by the
>     X.org board. There have also been follow-up initiatives started by the
>     board. What is your opinion about these initiatives and their results? Any
>     suggestions?

They have successfully brought new people into the community.  Huge success.

> 10) X.org hosting infrastructure has had its hiccups over the past few years.
>     The loss of all users home directories on freedesktop.org and the breach of
>     trust through defamation of a driver repository by former board members
>     come to mind. What is your opinion about the current situation, how would
>     you want to improve it?

Things are running fine for a volunteer organization.

> 11) The membership of the X.org foundation is not completely representative
>     with respect to its contributing audience, and it is hard to motivate
>     people to become a member of the X.org foundation. Some people suggest
>     linking commit access with membership. What is your opinion, and do you
>     have any further suggestions?

Having been the person approving members since the first elections
process I went through as a board member, I feel that representation in
the members list is in fine shape.  I like the current system because it
allows non-developers involvement in the foundation.

> 12) Are there any topics that were overlooked in this questionnaire? Is there
>     something else that you would like to talk about now and/or work on during
>     your term on the board?
> 
> 13) What do you think about this questionnaire? Should this initiative be
>     repeated, and do you have any suggestions for such future repeats?
> 
> 14) How do you feel about the size of the Xorg board?  Should it be
> changed?

8 is fine.

> 15) Some have argued that the current election process is flawed.  Do you
>     agree?  What do you think is flawed and how can it be improved in the
>     future?

Disagree.

> 16) The Xorg Foundation has been working on getting 501(c)3 non-profit status
>     for a while now.  Would you be interested in getting involved with this
>     work?

It is almost done from my understanding.

> 17) It has been brought up in several board meetings that we should donate some
>     money to the SFLC (Software Freedom Law Center) for their help various
>     legal matters.  Do you agree with this?

We voted on this, it was near consensus including me.

> 18) Non-profit corporations have certain requirements with respect to where
>     their funding comes from depending on the type of non-profit they are.
>     Should the Xorg Foundation actively solicit donations from the community to
>     fund it's activities (developer conferences, travel expenses,
>     infrastructure expenses, etc.)?

Unless there are legal requirements otherwise, we have had no issues
with getting sufficient funding from corporate sponsors and I don't see
a reason to change that.

> 19) If you agree with the soliciting funding from the community, would you be
>     interested in taking on a role to help reach that end?  If so, what ideas
>     do you have for soliciting these donations?  If you don't agree, where
>     should the Xorg foundation look to get it's funding?
> 
> 20) With new platforms such as android and programs like wayland, some would
>     say X is becoming less relevant.  Do you agree with that statement?  Where
>     do you see X going in the future?

X is certainly becoming less relevant in terms of linux window system
marketshare.  I do see X remaining relevant as a linux desktop windowing
system for a long time, because it will take a long time for any
competitor to catch up to the relevant features X supports.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://foundation.x.org/archives/members/attachments/20110216/6a0c87a1/attachment.pgp>