On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 15:32:13 +0100, John Watson <email@example.com> said:
>> No flame please. :)
>> I have not commented in detail on your ideas about how to use money
>> in the project, because I'm just a volunteer interested in showing
>> off how smart I am :) and unfortunately also revealing how much I
>> still can learn. Note that the Debian project is very
> Yes but the framework example I just given is still volunteer-driven,
If one is being paid to do work, it makes the work no longer a
volunteer activity. So says my dictionary.
> ideas is suggested by volunteers, project leader is voted by
> volunteers, I dont see any reason why such a framework would stop
> debian being a volunteer-driven type project.
Being paid based on popularity does not alter the fact that some
subset of people are being paid, and others are not, for what could be
equivalent amounts of work done. Such an imbalance would make Debian
unpalatable for me, personally. Other developers may or may not agree,
but I for one think that injection of paid work into Debian would make
Debian less fun for me.
>> and money is a sensitive subject.
> Again another reason why to have a framework in place to limit future
> disputes and possible delays.
No, the mere presence of a framework would, in my eyes, change
the very nature of Debian, and increase, not decrease, disputes and
>> For now I prefer to stay out of flamewars about money in Debian, and
>> focus on the interesting parts: the software.
> Its not a discussion about money, its about placing a framework in
> place on how money is allocated if debian recieves investment.
And the implicit assumptrion being that injection of monetary
rewards into a volunteer activity is de-facto OK, which is a viewpoint
not shared by everyone.
When the English language gets in my way, I walk over it. Billy Sunday
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C