[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [DRAFT FOR REVIEW] Government owned IT enterprise SERPRO selected Debian GNU/Linux for its servers and wish to collaborate



Hello, Jon

> The only question I have is about the last sentence:
> 
> SERPRO also, along with other companies, sponsored the Debian Day
> Porto Alegre.
> 
> Can you be more specific about their support I wonder? Were they the
> biggest sponsor? How many other sponsors were there? Have they a track
> record of sponsoring FOSS/Debian, or is this their first?
> 

I actually have *strong* worries about using "sponsored" word [2].
As a government owned, serpro is subject to astoundingly **strict**
rules about sponsoring with money only pre-qualified entities.
So, it SUPPORTED / HELPED the event by lenting rooms, equipments, some
support staff. No money.
You could read the description of what was done at revision 15 [0].
There were other 5 entities that supported the event by various means,
listed at very end of [1], section "Apoio".
No money was handed to the Debian local user group. Some of entities
gave us some shirts, some food for the coffee-break, some printed
posters, some hours of their PR pros, some hours of support staff.
SERPRO lent the "lion share" resources among them to the event.
Despite [2] listing such meaning too, fowarding money is the most used
meaning of it.


> When you list, using commas, put a comma before, and so that it
> indicates that you have just given a list.
> 
> In the shop I bought apples, bananas, and cabbage.
> 
> It's not a strict rule by any means, it just indicates clearly that
> you have given a list.

Oh, it is just somewhat different from brazilian portuguese rules.
Please, correct it by british english rules.


Thanks!
Andre Felipe 



[0]
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Publicity/DebianTimesTeam/Drafts/SerproChoseDebianAndCollaborate?action=recall&rev=15
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/pt_BR/DebianDayBrasil2008RsPortoAlegre
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsor_(commercial)


Reply to: