Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests
Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests"):
Ian Jackson :
> > From Debian's point of view: I think that anyone who takes prolonged
> > employment with an organisation which takes an active interest in
> > their Debian work, to the extent of taking an interest in what they
> > say about Debian and Free Software, ought to declare that.
>
> My employer pays for me to go speak at Debconf. I'm not sure if that
> passes that bar or not.
Certainly it does. There are things you might reasonably say in a
Debconf talk, or topics that you might choose, that many employers
would object to.
It may be that there are no things you might feel like saying that
you think your employer would actually object to. But of course that
depends on your assessment of your relationship with your employer.
People outside that relationship aren't privy to the conversations you
have with your management. And they may have a different view about
your employer's overall trustworthiness than you do.
> > > An example of what I do think could cause conflicts of interest is
> > > where I'm part of some community (free software or not) and my
> > > interest is in ensuring I have a good standing or status in that
> > > community and this colours judgements I make in Debian.
> >
> > Most of the communities like that I am part of, are either
> > sufficiently remote from software that they wouldn't care, or are
> > themselves technology projects.
> >
> > In the latter case, most of the information is already public. It
> > would be impractical and pointless to ask everyone to collate it.
>
> Isn't that what the wiki page is about? Else, you're saying I should
> put nothing on there, since it's all public already.
I think we are still exploring the question of scope in this thread.
As I said earlier, I think substantial financial interests, including
employment in particular, are special. (They may also, in general,
not already be public for everyone.)
Ian.
Reply to: