Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests
On May 9, 2017 8:09:28 AM EDT, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote:
>> However in the interests of transparency I feel that a voluntary,
>> opt-in "Register of Interests" is a good idea for the project. I feel
>> that such a list (populated) would demonstrate the transparency and
>> openness that are part of our project's values.
>
>I think this is a good idea.
I think it's a horrible idea. One of the major draws of Debian is that we are all here for our own reasons. I don't judge your motivations and you don't judge nine.
>>> This is a voluntary, opt-in register of Debian contributor's
>"Interests"
>>> (such as: employer).
>
>It would be a good idea to make an annex, giving a list of kinds of
>"interest" that do not need to be mentioned; and ones that should be
>mentioned.
>
>Things that are _not_ interests worthy of disclosure:
>
> * Holding positions of responsibility within the Debian project,
> or a Debian Trusted Organisation
>
> * Involvement with political parties (even ones focusing on
> technology or information rights)
>
> * Using Debian or one of its derivatives, on one's personal
> systems
>
> * Holding positions of responsibility in Free Software projects,
> other than positions of financial responsibility for projects with
> assets or annual income of more than Eur1,000.
>
> * Mere membership of charities, pressure groups, industry
> associations, etc.
>
>Things that _are_ interests worthy of disclosure:
>
> * Being paid to work on Debian
>
> * Being paid to work on hardware that Debian runs on or might run on
>
> * Being in a position of influence or authority regarding technology
> purchasing decisions. Exceptions: your own personal purchasing
> and that of your household and your friends; Debian and Debian's
> TOs.; spends of less than Eur1,000 per year.
>
> * Holding a formal position of influence or authority in charities,
> pressure groups or industry associations which relate to software
> or computing hardware, information rights, or state-granted
> information monopolies ("intellectual property").
>
>I would like to settle the boundaries before we start populating the
>list.
>
>>> || '''User''' || '''Interest''' || '''From''' || '''Until''' ||
>>> || JonDowland || Red Hat || 2015 || - ||
>
>The list should have a date at which the user's entry was last
>updated and signed off by them as complete.
>
>Ian.
If this became a requirement, I'd have to terminate my relationship with Debian. These are frankly none of anyone's business.
I've packaged software because a project I was being paid to work on needed it and I was able to convince them it made sense to put it in the Debian archive.
The client is private and will remain so. All rules like the above will accomplish is me spending time on working on things for such clients in private rather than in the Debian archive.
If there were a case where I had an actual conflict of interest (e.g. recommending Debian spend funds with an organization that I had a financial interest in), that should be disclosed. That's oddly missing from the list.
Scott K
Reply to: