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

Stig Roar srw at openmailbox.org
Fri Apr 14 20:00:27 GMT 2017

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:40:25PM +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 14.04.2017 22:28, 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)
> To my knowledge, this budget has only been presented privately to fauno
> and me, and not publicly to the community. You have dismissed fauno's
> concerns as "unnecessary drama", although none of you have presented
> publicly the community the exact model of the server mainboard nor the
> budget to be approved or not by consensus. And you have urged us to
> quickly provide partial funding for your solution for the build server.
> > 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
> You have asked for partial funding from the Parabola fund handled by
> Ceata, although you have disregarded Parabola Social Contract,
> Ceata-Parabola Fiscal Sponsorship Agreement and Parabola's Delegate.
> And please note that if you make a personal fully-funded donation, you
> still need the approval of the community to accept the donation.
> Otherwise, it's just a donation to Emulatorman and can't be mentioned on
> the Donations wiki page of the Parabola community.
> I'm sure you understand all of this.
> Tiberiu

What are you saying? Are you saying that if I, for example, would like
to donate to one or more devs, the community has got to approve it? Or
do you mean if the devs themselves are making donations the community
has to approve it? Obviously it's only the software that is free in this

I think my conclution to all this would then be that g4jc and
emulatorman should take their server and do something useful with it
elsewhere. Perhaps they also could enjoy their donations in peace. 

I thought that individual donations to devs also could be mentioned on
the Parabola site? No? 

This is getting weird. 

> _______________________________________________
> 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/fe003a90/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list