From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEE4E3858C54 for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2022 11:47:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org DEE4E3858C54 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (83-87-18-245.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.87.18.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADC5B302AB2C; Fri, 2 Sep 2022 13:47:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CAE1A403DCA4; Fri, 2 Sep 2022 13:47:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <70a52e50d49145e70db0361dc67dfb9ab48cf0af.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: proposing Sourceware as Software Freedom Conservancy member project From: Mark Wielaard To: Overseers mailing list Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Daniel Pono Takamori , "Bradley M. Kuhn" Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2022 13:47:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_SHORT,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi, On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 14:03 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler via Overseers wrote: > We are reaching out to the 20 most active projects on > Sourceware (binutils, bunsen, bzip2, cgen, cygwin, debugedit, dwz, > elfutils, gcc, gccrs, gdb, glibc, insight, kawa, libabigail, libffi, > newlib, sid, systemtap, valgrind) about this proposal to make sure > nobody is caught unaware. And Sourceware is also responsible for > preserving the history of another 40 projects which are either less > active, have been archived or moved on. So this generated almost 6000 emails about the proposal and even an lwn news article: https://lwn.net/Articles/906502/ And normally you hit at least one troll when doing such a broad public discussion (knock on wood) which is why I was a little hesitant when the Conservancy requested we be very public about the application. But all responses have been positive. I didn't even get any negative personal emails about spamming so many people. Also asking around in some of the irc channels of a few sourceware projects people seemed positive about the application or at worst neutral. No negative reactions at all. So I believe people are generally happy with how overseers are handling sourceware and people trust SFC to be a good fiscal sponsor for the project. Cheers, Mark