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

Re: Debian UK

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> Things have gotten muddled though and that's the problem.  There's a
> number of issues here:

Thanks for the fresh eyeballs. Here's my take:

> 1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian
> 2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot
> 3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK'
> 4) The 'opt-out' membership
> 5) The beer-bashes
> 6) The bank account [...]

1, 3 and 6 can go together IMO. 4 should never happen for debian.

2 and 3 should not go together unless all businesses can use the name
(perhaps with a reasonable and non-discriminatory(!) standard). That
would be quite a shift from the old position, but may be welcome.

I don't care about 5 either way, as long as it's clear to donors
if grouped with 1 and people know what their money is spent on.

There's also "public appearances as Debian" which should be
avoided by licensees.

> Businesses are not inherently evil but they do have different priorities
> than Debian.  I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound
> like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless.

I have no problem with business. I have worked for businesses
since I was ~14, with a small break 1995-6 (I think). The "evil"
thing was introduced to the thread by someone else, not me, but
DUS is the first business I've been told I joined without asking!
That may qualify as "evil" even if nothing else does... :-/

> [...] Certainly if Debian/SPI isn't going to do it then
> Debian/SPI in other countries shouldn't either.  That's what
> Debian-UK comes across to me as- the UK branch of Debian. [...]

http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info says "Debian does not sell
any products" -- how did that come about?  I can trace it back
to Feb 1999 by James A. Treacy with a request for comments to
go to debian-www, but I didn't find any comments there.

MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Reply to: