On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 02:55:19AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 08:55:25 +0200, Mike Hommey <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> > On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 11:41:43PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava
> > <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> 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.
> > What injection ? There is already people being paid to work on Debian.
> If you do not see the distinction between getting a job with an
> external entity paying people to work on debian, and having ones fellow
> developers in an a position to determine whether one gets money or not,
> then I don't know how to explain it.
> Already one could find reluctance in opposing aj or Ted or
> Raphael on technical issues, even one feels it might not be in the best
> interest of the project, since in the future one could be in need of
> the money that could be steered ones way by the dunc tank powers that
> The injection of an employer-employee relationship in Debian is
> not something I think is in the best interest of the project.
Sorry, I just zapped from my mind the part of the initial post where the
"framework" idea exposed just looks like dunc tank.
Indeed, such thing would be half new, since we've had the dunc tank
"experiment". But money is not something new in Debian, that was my
point. Some uses of it may, though.