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

Re: Debian Etch Stable.

On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 12:04:04PM +0100, Amaya wrote:
> Marc Haber wrote:
> > Otoh, I see a truckload of unpaid DDs vituperating and spreading bad
> > mood around the project. _That's_ the real harm that was caused - very
> > indirectly - by dunctank.
> I tend to agree with you. 
> Real experiments are done in Lab conditions, in 0-gravity environments
> and the such. Calling this a "experiment" is at least bad wording.
> (My personal position is neither pro-money-for-DDs nor
> anti-money-for-DDs).
> But this is no serious experiment. I fear the huge troll upcoming when
> Etch is released instead of the the huge clustered BBQs areoung the
> globe.
Hi *,
there are many factors that are odd with this 'experiment':

sample size: 2

exactly what does one get with that? Unless you want to consider the
possible viewpoint that the actual sample size is not the 2 people being
paid but the number of people who where affected by those 2. So maybe in
that regard the sample size was: 1000+ (debian developers, debian
maintainers, debian users, etc.)

Ability to include random person: 0

Any company, for-profit, NGO, not-for-profit, or Free software project
does not pick anybody randomly to do any job. In the free software
world, it depends upon social networking and a meritocracy. So there was
0% probability that anyone other then vorlon or aba was going to do the
job. They are part of Debian proper, they are part of Free software
community, They have cred in said communities for their skill and
devotion. Its not like Debian was going to allow 'dillbert' or 'dogbert'
to walk in and get paid by 'the cabal'(in the general sense, not the one
we have) to do RM work. These 2 guys, barring the odd Force Majure,
would do the job. 

The only question was what would both Debian and they have to sacrifice
to do it. If they were unable to do it, the release would be delayed and
we'd have to find someone to fill-in who would not be familar with the
work, thus delaying things longer. By 'someone' paying their expenses
(whatever that was), it ensured that they at least would be able (and
since they were already willing) to devote their time to RM work and not
to the task of find a means to support themselves for a month or so. I'd
expect that their search for employment and any subsequent job and pay
would have reduced their changes of contributing to RM work, seeing how
they were going to it. Would they have made more money doing something
else? I would probably say yes. So I would assume that they lost a
possible chance for more lucrative work. 

The only other question is about paying anybody. Would this make a case
for any other person to be paid? Who should be paid? With the other
factor being how it would affect other people in the project. As
some others have pointed out, people are paid for their work: Joeyh,
Qfunk, 'mr progeny' Murdock, etc. (IIRC?). People are paid to directly
create debian packages, to create software X in a deb, some folks make
debs of what they use in their work duties, etc. But the factor that
they have in common is their desire to contribute to Debian, to work,
whether in their work hours or free time on contributing to Debian. 

The issue seems to be of being valued externally. Money = 'People value
what I do' in a public way (on top of the obvious need to pay bills). In
this case, money to one person somehow says that those who do not get
money are not valued in the same way. And this is where the trouble

Happy $HOLIDAY and hoping to make an 'etch-a-sketch' cake sometime soon!

|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:       |
| : :' :      The  Universal     | debian.home.pipeline.com |
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656   |
|     my keysever: pgp.mit.edu   |     my NPO: cfsg.org     |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: