Re: Proposal: Recall the Project Leader
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:26:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> The debate has been launched on -private, but it's clear to everyone
> that we were very far from a consensus. So, instead of *beeing
> consistent* with the *consensus* of the opinions, a so called "external"
> structure has been launched. Onboard, we see many very well known
You know, this is far from the first time a situation like this has
Some others, none of which caused proposals like this to occur,
* Ubuntu is funding Debian developers due to a disagreement about
direction, emphasis, and release practices. A very real fork,
yet with many common developers with Debian.
* Progeny funded Debian developers working on alternative Debian
installers, configuration tools, and a host of other items and was
led at the time by none other than the founder of Debian (Ian
Murdock). Many of Progeny's employees were and are Debian
developers, with a former DPL (Branden) among them.
* Bruce, a former DPL, being involved with a venture capital firm that
funded Debian developers.
* Debian itself donated $1000 to the Gnome project to fund its
development due to a dispute with KDE over Qt licensing.
I don't recall this coming with strings such as "can't be spent on
programmer time". So there is even precedent for the project
doing this sort of thing.
> The letter *and* the spirit of the Constitution have been flouted. And
> here is my rationale to second the recall of Anthony Towns.
You have yet to show that the Debian constitution does, or even should,
apply to actions that occur outside of Debian.
AJ is also a programmer -- do you claim that the Debian constitution
and social contract prevents him from working for a proprietary
software company on his own time?