Re: Debian Partners Program (resend)
Hi,
this was maimed by our mail gateway, here is a retry
(Nils, did you get anything in your copy?)
t.aa
Forwarded message:
> From astala@tnso13.tele.nokia.fi Sun Sep 6 22:19 EES 1998
> From: astala@tnso13.tele.nokia.fi (Arto Astala)
> Message-Id: <[🔎] 199809061919.WAA28913@tnso14.tele.nokia.fi>
> Subject: Re: Debian Partners Program
> To: lohner@ICD.Teradyne.COM
> Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 22:19:51 +0300 (EEST)
> Cc: debian-publicity@lists.debian.org,
> astala@tnso13.tele.nokia.fi (Arto Astala)
> Reply-To: arto.astala@ntc.nokia.com
> In-Reply-To: <199808041653.MAA21663@typhoon.icd.teradyne.com> from "lohner@ICD.Teradyne.COM" at Aug 4, 98 12:53:35 pm
> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Length: 4056
>
> Hi,
>
> this was the latest 'Partners' subject in my inbox (now that
> I'm catching up after vacation), so I'll comment here both of
> my thoughts.
>
> This is a fine idea, and really has two sides. One is Ean's
> commercial entities and reciprocal publicity, and other is
> Matthew Hirsch's volunteer effort.
>
> These both are about contribution, support and recognition.
> I would, hesitantly, add a third side: certification.
>
> -
>
> On the commercial side you should mention also donations, not
> only reduced cost. You also should make it clear that partnership
> is something granted by Debian, at Debian's discretion, and
> can be terminated or revoked, when suitable grounds exist.
>
> I think it would be more important, both for the partners and
> for Debian, to state how Partnership is granted and revoked
> than to give detailed descriptions of kinds of partnership.
> (Current descriptions can be retained _as examples_.)
>
> I do not like 'Exclusive Partners', since neither Debian, Linux
> nor free sw does gain anything by being exclusive. Probably it's
> the other way round. Rather have something like 'Major Partner'
> or 'Really Good Friend' or any other positive name. Debian
> can also state that support and visibility given by Debian will
> be related to significance of Partner's contribution.
>
> Debians commitments should be carefully thought out, since
> these all, even web space, depend on volunteer effort. The only
> really free part is Partner's right to use Debian logo and
> nomination 'Debian Partner'. Especially suspect should be any
> promises which might imply any influence over Debian project.
> I mean that if they are developers they have normal developer
> rights, partnership does not guarantee any additional rights.
>
> There is nothing wrong with good working relationships, however.
>
> -
>
> On the volunteer side there is that 'where two or three ...'
> Debian could, and maybe should exploit. But here too, is the
> ethical issue. Debian should act as one example of free sw and
> open development, always furthering the idea but never trying to
> monopolize it.
>
> What, then, could Debian and Volunteer Partners give each other?
>
> Partners can give Debian *effort, *enthusiasm and *expertise.
> Maybe even something tangible, like use of disk space and cd
> burner, but that is secondary. The primary thing is that they
> want to do something for Debian because Debian is a great project.
>
> They could do Debian install fests, have Debian support corners in
> their club, maintain some FAQ, or be The Debian Test & Shakedown
> Club. Whatever. Just do that _as a group_.
>
> Debian can give recognition and special support. That's it.
> Well, maybe we can persuade some others also to give recognition.
> If some user group is nominated Partner then maybe Linux Journal
> will let them carry partner logo with their entry in GLUE.
> Debian might have a dedicated mailing list for partners, where
> also some developers participate.
>
> Imagine the effort some people would be ready to expend just
> to get their club nominated 'Debian Partner', maybe even their
> own name as the Debian expert. (Well, maybe not, but oe can
> always hope.) Anyway, this is the hacker way, giving recognition
> in exchange of work done.
>
> -
>
> Should Debian have or do certification, accredition or whatever?
> Could Debian do it in any meaningful way? I think the answer is
> yes to both questions. Those partners that do user support or
> system configuration shold be certified. The certification should
> be informal, rely on partner's expression of intent and user
> feedback.
>
> It should go like this:
> - prospective certifiee announces intent
> - Debian ascertains that certifiee has capability to understand
> the why and how of Debian (e.g. has some Unix experience)
> - certifiee assures that s/he has read and understood the
> social contract, DFSG, policy and FHS
> - possibly some specific issues are discussed, like where the
> certifiee, who is also partner, will put the non-Debian apps
> and why
> - certifiee is certified and has that status until somebody
> complains about his/her incompetence
>
> -
>
> For now, That's all, folks.
>
> t.aa
>
>
Reply to: