The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 1. RFD: Reorganization of the Debian Project

Dominik Kubla wrote:
> 
> 2. Election of a board of directors.  The BoD should supervise the
>    development process, make official statements on behalf of the
>    project and draft policy decisions to be decided by the Project
>    Members.
I agree. We all have different personal views of what is important and 
what is not in a Debian release (security, schedules, ease of use, 
stability). There are many different issues. Too many for anybody
to have a deep knowledge about all of them. I don't think that 
leaving the decision to one man alone is the best option.

Perhaps we may have another look at our release schedule also?

Solid-rock-fixed dates are not good enough for a variable
environment as ours. IMHO, instead of, say, 'December 1st = release
date', it would be better 'December, first fortnight'.
We all must try to get things done for the first day of the fortnight,
but nobody will flame us if we release some days or a _week_ later...

Also, the beta-test period gives the Linux community the feeling that 
'something is going on' in Debian. (Hey dude! Those guys are going to
release something in a few days! And it's gonna be great!) :-)

> 3. Registering the "The Debian Project" as (non-profit) organization.
>    Thus allowing the project to accept donations and to collect fees
>    for the usage of its tradmarks (see below).
>    
> 4. Trademarking the names "Debian", "Debian Project" and
>    "Debian-Linux" to prevent misuse and to collect (moderate) fees
>    from CD distributors (mostly to cover the expenses of the project
>    like network connectivty provided by I-Connect)
> 
I see two different things here: 
- registering and trademarking will give us a "legal" status. It will 
protect us from things like the "Linux is TM" stuff. I think this
is a Good Thing. 
- collecting donations is ok, but asking CD distributors to pay for
the use of "our name" is something we must think carefully. It can
discourage many of them, and give rise to some other problems,
what about Linux User Groups making their own Debian CDs, and giving
them "for free"? (CD writers are cheap these days) Should they pay also?
I prefer the idea of distributing an 'official' Debian GNU/Linux CD.

> These proposals are not meant as disaproval of the activities of any
> member of the Debian Team, but the conclusion drawn from reviewing the
> recent events.
> 
Ditto.
In changing times, all of us have something to learn from the experience.

///////////////////////////////////////////////
Fabrizio Polacco wrote:
> The "scheduled release = don't procrastinate" argument is of primary
> importance from the "business" point of view, the one from which CD
> makers and large network/corporation look at Debian.
> The "fix all the security holes" argument is of primary importance from
> the developer's point of view.
I don't think that Panix people would agree with your opinion.
A widely known and easily explotaible security hole is a real nightmare
for any system manager in any "business" computer network. Those tiny
security holes may cost big-real-money (Have you ever met an upset
ex-co-worker with remote access to your network? Or a competitor
with a good social-engineering staff? Is it easier to get the root
password or just some user's password? Those are real threats, not only
developer's toys.)

> Well, even if this can appear foolish, I suggest that Debian should give
> up releasing distributions.
It's an interesting idea that must be discussed more deeply...
The steady-state replacement that you propose can be really useful.
( Except in mayor changes like 1.2.x kernels to 2.0.x kernels? )
The only disadvantage I see is that of the "moving target" feeling we
may give to the CD distributors, or even the "business" market.
(Those suits really like well publicized release dates, with all
that "lights and music" stuff) ;-) 

	Best wishes,
-- 
Enrique Zanardi                                            ezanardi@ull.es
Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental             http://www.dfis.ull.es
Univ. de La Laguna


--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com