[Dev] Q1: Do you have a consensus on the budget for the Build Server?

[Stig Roar]

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 07:28:13PM +0000, Luke wrote:
> On 04/14/2017 06:58 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> > On 14.04.2017 21:43, Josh Branning wrote:
> >>> So, my question is: has the Parabola community been presented and have
> >>> you discussed options and the detailed budget for the new build server?
> >>> Have you reached a consensus about this for fauno to tell me what needs
> >>> to paid for?
> >> Relevant to this question is a response from Luke, gc4j, 06/04/17 23:47.
> 
> Josh is correct, that is the current information.
> Chasis just arrived, still waiting on power supply to arrive in the mail.
> 
> The e-mail he referenced can be found here:
> https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/004889.html
> 
> 
> > That response has come with considerable delay, after everything has
> > become public. I have been asked privately to pay $400 USD on 26/03/17
> > 12:07. That is, 10 days earlier. I consider this private request to
> > violate both the Parabola Social Contract and Parabola-Ceata Fiscal
> > Sponsorship Agreement.
> 
> I assume you are referring to Emulatorman's e-mail which he sent to
> fauno and yourself. I was CC'd on it. At the time we only had a
> motherboard, cpu, and heat sinks. He provided estimated prices on
> shipping products from Urutek, New Egg, and Amazon to complete the
> server. (Chasis, ram, power supply)
> 
> I've since gone ahead and gotten the other parts myself, using my own
> money, as they were cheaper to acquire locally.
> 
> Answer to Q1:
> Budget cost for build server to Ceata and community = $0.00


i:Exit  -:PrevPg  <Space>:NextPg v:View Attachm.  d:Del  r:Reply  j:Next ?:Help
> to paid for?
> 
> Have you discussed location of the new build server? This is relevant
> for the shipping/collocation.
> 
> I'm looking forward to hearing what you all have to say on this matter.
> 
> Tiberiu

I really don't get this. Is this really the changes the Social Contract
is talking about? Has it ever occured to you that Emulatorman wanted to
buy and even pay for this himself for the benefit of the whole community
and Parabola? OK, so let's say that I'm in the future want to port some
games from Lua (or whatever) to C, or even want to do some kernels, and I buy
myself a server or whatever. Is that really the changes that falls under
the Social Contract? Shouldn't the community be happy that I have some
up-to-date devices to maintain Parabola? So what if there were some
talking about this? What harm does it do to the community that the guy
doing all the maintaining wishes himself a build server?

It's like someone has commited a huge crime for talking to eachother
about how this could come true.

Well, as far as I know, those guys (g4jc, Emulatorman) with some direct
donations from others as well made this come true by themselves, so
technically the build server is now not owned by Parabola nor the community.
So if Emulatorman want to use this build server for Parabola or not, is
really up to him. I would guess 'no', after all the shit he and others as
to put up  with, and the resistance they have  met from the very beginning
of this process. The build server could have benifited Parabola, but the
- SF- 1/927: Stig Roar              Re: [Dev] Q1: Do you have a consens -- (87%)





> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170414/340ed3f1/attachment.sig>