Issues Within The X.Org Foundation?

[airlied]

That would be an ATI candidate, in this case, as the other case would require one of the AMD GPGPU people to be involved (the same people who got you the evergreen ISA docs).

Don't think we have any X.org members from that group, maybe since you seem to know the AMD internal company structure so well you could talk to them and see if they have any interest in joining X.org or running for the board.

Dave.

[daniels]

That said, the board's activities seem to be pretty vendor-neutral so vendor affiliation doesn't seem like a big issue.

right. regardless of who we work for, we act in the best interests (as we perceive it) of the Foundation and of X.Org as a whole. board members are explicitly acting as personal representatives, not as company/vendor representatives; i would not vote for someone who attempted to get elected to further their employer's interests.

[libv]

Who sits on the board from AMD/ATI?

That would be an ATI candidate, in this case, as the other case would require one of the AMD GPGPU people to be involved (the same people who got you the evergreen ISA docs).

[libv]

Pre-election, nobody from ATI/AMD. Alex (agd5f) was one of the candidates for this election, so after the votes are counted he might be on the board.

That said, the board's activities seem to be pretty vendor-neutral so vendor affiliation doesn't seem like a big issue.

They are supposed to be, but how could we know that? We have almost no information on what happens.

[bridgman]

Who sits on the board from AMD/ATI?

Pre-election, nobody from ATI/AMD. Alex (agd5f) was one of the candidates for this election, so after the votes are counted he might be on the board.

That said, the board's activities seem to be pretty vendor-neutral so vendor affiliation doesn't seem like a big issue.

[deanjo]

Sounds like they need a couple of non-company affiliated board members to

a) be the voice of the end user
b) be a watchdog on the funds

[numasan]

Who sits on the board from AMD/ATI?

[bridgman]

AFAIK there's already a rule for that, limiting the board to a maximum of two directors from any single company. Two out of 8 seems OK, doesn't it ?

[Hephasteus]

It's Xorg not IntelOrg. As much as Intel contributes to open source they should still not be allowed any dominant positions within it.

[daniels]

FWIW:
The Foundation is not a 501(c)(3) yet. It's still a Delaware LLC, in the process of transitioning to a 501(c)(3) with help from the SFLC, but this is slow going.

Also, I said that I personally found it difficult to attend the meetings, as I'm the only one in Asia/Oceania. When it comes to scheduling meetings, you can really pick two out of America, Europe and Asia, so Australia lost out. This was fair enough, and one of the reasons I decided to leave. It doesn't impact anyone else on the board, past, present or in the current crop of candidates.