On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 02:21:22PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> So it is important that any agreement we enter into does not commit us
> to retaining any particular search engine, nor commit us to retaining
> it as the default. We should be free at any time to change the
> configuration we ship.
Agreed. Yet another argument for the 25% option (which, again, was the
only one I meant to discuss). But you make a good point that, even if
we'll end up having DDG as the default on all our browsers, we should
remain on the 25% option, to avoid getting too "tied up" with
agreements. I completely agree.
> To avoid bias, I would suggest that we avoid mentioning the exact
> amounts of money we gain in contexts where it might influence, even
> subconsciously, our technical choices.
This is at stake with the good principle that our finances should be
public, though. (And I think the finance transparency principle should
win, on this.)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature