El 25/04/16 a las 02:07, Luca Filipozzi escribió: > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:55:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > Do you have some concrete suggestions? > > Decrease the separation by moving the funds management into Debian proper (via > a TO like SPI) and move to a bounty model for working on LTS. Make sure we're > transparent with our language regarding Debian being produced by volunteers > (eg: "The Debian Project consists of volunteers, and our products are developed > entirely by volunteers." on [1]) by commenting on how bounties are available > (or something). Consider making LTS management a delegated team. > > OR > > Increase the separation by removing the fundraising statements / links from the > LTS pages previously mentioned, making Freexian just another consultancy listed > on the consultancy pages. > > None of this is meant to diminish or tarnish the very significant contribution > that you or Freexian are making, which are both extensive and impressive. I'm > seeking greater definition of the role and the language used. As a Debian LTS paid contributor, I would disagree to get money from Debian own funds or directly by Debian in exchange of a my work. And this is for any of my work on the project. I agree with the consultancy model and I obviously support the Freexian umbrella, which I think is highly valuable. So if the LTS Funding statement is not clear enough, I prefer to increase the separation in https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Funding. Thanks for bringing this up! From the other side, what about armel/armhf LTS support? No objecting voices? Cheers, Santiago
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature