On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 08:36:08AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Thursday 17 February 2011 19.17:58 Francesca Ciceri wrote: > > So, what you think about it? > > Yes, I think the patch shows the direction I had in mind. Not sure if it > should say for debian.ch (and other such organisations, if they should come > to be listed here) "the vendor is a Debian organisation" instead of "gives > all proceeds to Debian" - debian.ch does have official status. > > (As Luca said: this is not to single out debian.ch. There may be other > organsations with similar status that do their own merchandising -- Debian > UK? -- and the same holds for them, too.) > > cheers > -- vbi > Yes, I understand that debian.ch (and similar organisation, as Debian UK as you suggest) is a Debian sister (have an official status) AND give all proceeds to Debian Project. But, IMHO, for the specific purpose of the merchandise page (i.e. to inform users of existence of Debian merchandise vendors) the more relevant information is the one about the destination of the proceeds (as you have stated in a previous mail user could be more happy to see that proceeds fully or partially goes to Debian). More important, there could be vendors who have not an official status but who give all proceeds to Debian (and the "the vendor is a Debian organisation" would be false and the categorization not exhaustive). Last but not least, at that point we would be obliged to list every Debian sisters (or to be correct Debian Trusted Organization): as the DPL (added in CC) said to me yesterday on IRC this kind of list already exists (http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Auditor/Organizations) and Debian Auditors take care of it. Adding it also in the merchandise page could turn out in unwanted duplication of information. BTW, I think that the Debian Trusted Organization list deserves a specific place on the website as it's a very official page and important page. Cheers, Francesca
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature