Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 02:41:30PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> That's why I have been advocating for a change of the DMUP. It has been used
> far too often to annoy persons who are being paid (or who are accepting
> donations) to work on Debian instead of causing real troubles that could
> annoy sponsors or create problems to the DSA team.
I think that the distinction between Debian LTS and Freexian is too indefinite.
https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/ makes it appear that LTS is an official Debian
effort.
However, https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Funding directs those interested in
providing funding in support LTS to do so through Freexian rather than through
Software in the Public Interest.
Freexian isn't a TO and the funds it collects aren't subject to the same
disbursement conditions (approval by DPL; execution by SPI Treasurer; review by
Debian Auditor) as funds collected by Debian.
Consequently, I find the use of Debian resources such as the advertising above
and/or the use of Debian machines as being problematic.
Make the distinction clearer, and the problem goes away.
> I have also been looking at ways to bring the "LTS funding" closer to Debian
> and to find a way to join all this in the Debian Partner program but we don't
> have many volunteers interested in this work. We discussed it a bit last year
> during Debconf with Luca Filippozi, Martin Krafft and Neil McGovern, but this
> never went further. And I obviously don't want to be leading this project due
> to the clear conflict of interest that I would have...
I'm interested in working on Debian Partners but not if it includes Debian LTS
fundraising as currently structured: either Debian LTS fundraising falls under
the same umbrella as other Debian fundraising (and subject to the same rules,
including that funds not be used for reimbursing effort, potentially) or it is
separate and branded as a Freexian service.
I don't begrudge people making a living supporting Debian.
I do mind the indistinction between Debian LTS and Freexian.
It's situations like these that cause organizations to have things like DMUP.
(You also have a clear conflict of interest in arguing for changes to the DMUP.
That said, periodic re-examination of policies and procedures is healthy for
organizations.)
(The majority of Debian equipment is still hosted by post-secondary
institutions where commercial activity using university resources is frowned
upon.)
--
Luca Filipozzi
http://www.crowdrise.com/SupportDebian
Reply to: