On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 02:21:22PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > So it is important that any agreement we enter into does not commit us > to retaining any particular search engine, nor commit us to retaining > it as the default. We should be free at any time to change the > configuration we ship. Agreed. Yet another argument for the 25% option (which, again, was the only one I meant to discuss). But you make a good point that, even if we'll end up having DDG as the default on all our browsers, we should remain on the 25% option, to avoid getting too "tied up" with agreements. I completely agree. > To avoid bias, I would suggest that we avoid mentioning the exact > amounts of money we gain in contexts where it might influence, even > subconsciously, our technical choices. This is at stake with the good principle that our finances should be public, though. (And I think the finance transparency principle should win, on this.) Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o . Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature