Re: revenue sharing agreement with DuckDuckGo
]] Stefano Zacchiroli
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:04:16AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > My point is that where the money goes should be a choice of the user,
> > with the default suggested to the user determined by upstream. Debian
> > should exert no influence over that choice, except maybe asking
> > upstream to add us to the choices available to the user.
> This is a very interesting aspect of this discussion. In fact it is the
> tip of a much more general discussion we could have, although I suspect
> it could go on for a long while... I don't think Debian as a Project has
> a position on that matter, at least not yet. What happens now is that,
> once more, the choice is up to the individual package maintainers, as
> per Debian default governance model.
I think this is a discussion we should have, but perhaps not right now
in this very thread.
> All in all, as a project we should simply see the agreement as something
> like "for every web browser in Debian who decides to use t=something,
> Debian will receive donations". If, due to the usual way we maintain
> packages, including upstream relationships, that set will shrink to
> nothing, too bad. The agreement will simply allow the set to exist, it
> will not magically fill it with browsers that implement t=something.
Based on this, I don't see any downsides for us in accepting such an
agreement, only possible upsides, so I think we should do it.
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are