Re: CALL FOR VOTES: First of two votes on social contract

[jdassen@wi.leidenuniv.nl (J.H.M.Dassen)]

On Jun 6, Dale Scheetz wrote
> Well, I don't read it that way, even with my "commercial hat on". What it
> says is that the user of the software takes precedents over someones
> interests in profit. This is a priciple tenent of the "free software
> ideal".

I don't question that principle; I just think that its current formulation
might all too easily be understood as negative towards commercial software
enterprises.

> > One of the complaints I often see on Usenet about Debian is the lack of
> > supported commercial software compared to Red Hat or Caldera.
> > 
> The reasons for this will be obvious to anyone reading this declaration.
> RedHat/Caldera is a commercially supported distribution. It has as one of
> its principle goals, providing a Linux distribution to host commercial,
> proprietary, products.
> While Debian does not now, and should never in the future, impede the use
> of Debian in a commercial indeavor (this is actively encouraged in other
> sections of this declaration) the desire is to keep development goals
> focused on providing the end user the most versatile Linux distribution
> available, not catering to needs for financial profit.

One of the end user's desires may very well include desiry for certain
functionality (e.g. programs) or support (e.g. 24hr hotline), which we ("the
free software community") cannot yet, and in some cases are not likely to
ever, provide.
Given this, I'd like to see us show an open hand towards commercial software
providers that can fulfill those needs.
"an open hand" does not mean that we are to follow all the whims of
commercial software providers, it does mean that if you are producing
commercial software, you are welcome to approach us ("the Debian project")
about making it available for Debian, and that we will try to assist as long
as this does not conflict with our primary goal.

(I'm thinking of an expression of a Dutch politician: "positieve
grondhouding", which translates to "positive base attitude": "yes, but with
reservations".).

> This document should be making those distinctions very clear, not warm and
> fuzzy.

I agree.

> > I suggest to replace this paragraph by something like
> > : We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software
> > : community. We realize that the needs of our (potential) users include
> > : software and services which the free software community cannot
> > : currently provide. In order to address those needs, we will cooperate
> > : with commercial software manufacturers in making their products
> > : available on Debian systems, and we welcome their input. 
> > 
> Although your statement is more "friendly" to commercial needs, but
> contains negative statements about free software. Yes, there are
> commercial products that provide functionality in a Linux environment not
> provided by free software. I see no reason to provide unpaid advertising
> of that fact in a document that is trying to make a positive statement
> about the advantages of free software.

Similarly, I see no reason to use wording that can (IMO) be too easily seen
as negative towards commercial enterprise. 

> I think we need to point out clearly that free software welcomes value
> added products with more limited licensing but we should also make it
> clear that we are not interested in technical changes whose sole purpose
> it to make someones proprietary software work better, so it will sell
> better. 

I don't agree that "we are not interested". I agree that this is not our
primary interest. I think that this is something that needs to be judged on
a per-case basis.

E.g. suppose company XYZ produces a commerical XDM, and would like to make
it available for Debian users. Now XDM is currently in xbase, and it is in
XYZ's interest to see xdm in a separate package, for plug-in replacement.
I don't want to send out to XYZ a message "don't even attempt to consider
asking the X maintainer to split his package". What I want, is to send out a
message to XYZ "Sure you can ask the X maintainer to split her package; we
leave it up to her to decide whether or not it is in the interest of Debian
and it's users to do so, under Debian's guidelines (esp. the social
contract), and whether or not to actually do it".

Greetings,
Ray
-- 
POPULATION EXPLOSION  Unique in human experience, an event which happened 
yesterday but which everyone swears won't happen until tomorrow.  
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan 


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .