Re: LoMuS

[address@hidden]

On 28 avr. 2012, at 09:15, Graham Percival wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:26:16AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
>> 
>> On 27 avr. 2012, at 08:07, Graham Percival wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:09:39AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
>>>>  I'd be good to set a precedent for this now so that LilyPond can apply
>>>>  to other software competitions in the future.
>>> 
>>> *sigh*
>> 
>> I'll formulate my question differently.  If anyone on the development team 
>> sends me an e-mail saying "Do not submit LilyPond to LoMuS", I won't submit 
>> LilyPond to LoMuS.
> 
> So... you *don't* want to set a precedent; you just want a quick
> answer about this specific case?  I guess the general consensus is
> "go ahead and we'll figure it out later".
> 

I *do* want this to work so well that it sets a solid precedent, but I think 
that a lot of times a ball can get rolling on a precedent with a quick answer 
about a specific case.

I get the sense in a way that the precedent has already been set - if someone 
sees a cool opportunity (GSoC, LoMuS, whatever), email the list to call dibs if 
dibs must be called, make sure no one is opposed, apply, and do something fair 
with the money if money is to be gotten.  In the GSoC case, Janek has $500 that 
he'll be donating to the organization in whatever way he sees fit.  In the 
Lomus case, if that works out, I'll have 3000 € and will do the same.  This 
seems like a reasonable way to handle this sorta thing.

Cheers,
MS