On Thursday, March 26, 2020 3:27:18 PM EDT Kyle Edwards wrote: > On Thu, 2020-03-26 at 19:57 +0100, Andrej Shadura wrote: > > An example: commercial users. They need to know *exactly* what they > > are running and under which licenses. They often want to be holier > > not > > only than the Pope, but holier than the whole population of Poland, > > Italy and Spanish-speaking countries altogether (I hope I don’t > > offend > > anyone with this comparison, it’s meant as a joke). They are often > > bound by regulations with heavy fines for violating them, and not > > only > > fines, but a threat of your product being banned, and that often > > means > > they want only specific licenses in their products. > > > > And then there are Debian derivatives that cater to such commercial > > users. And guess what? The users tell the makers of the derivatives > > debian/copyright data that comes from Debian is not sufficiently > > strict or precise, and for that they need to set up their own > > processes to double-check and review the Debian copyright data. > > Is it Debian's responsibility to cater to commercial users though? > Debian is not receiving commercial funding, or at least not directly. > It seems to me like the responsibility for this work falls on the > commercial users, not Debian. > > Kyle Debian claims its users are its priority. Not a specific sub-set of them. Scott K
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.