On 02/13/2012 01:10 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > - OSI history is intertwined with ours and we share a common heritage: > the DFSG. Having the actors interested in such a document work more > closely together is, IMHO, desirable. > > (As a side note on this: ours and OSI's version of DFSG have diverged > through the years. It'd be nice to see if we can merge the differences > and/or generalize the texts so that other distros and projects can > benefit from them.) > > - OSI seems to have evolved quite a bit as of recently. After many years > of low activity, they have took part in important political battles > for Free Software. They have also done so side by side with other > organizations, including the FSF (see [4] for a recent example on > software patents). Those battles are important for Debian and their > outcomes will influence us, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately > we rarely have the energy, structure, or visibility to fight them. > Lacking those resources, joining an association who has them is a > useful way to contribute. > > [4] http://www.fsf.org/news/osi-fsf-joint-position-cptn > > > Again, the above is just my personal advice. I'll be happy to read your > comments and use them to make a more informed decision. I found the same reasons in my head while reading the first part of your email. I truly believe Debian should be an OSI affiliate Regards. -- Jose Luis Rivas - GPG: 0x7C4DF50D / 0xCACAB118 The Debian Project Developer -- http://ghostbar.ath.cx Barquisimeto, Venezuela
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature