If it’s Debian plus additional non-Debian work done by Amazon or Microsoft, is it Debian? Would calling it Debian mislead users as to the origin of the additional work/configuration?
It’s clear that Microsoft and Amazon have something to gain in using the Debian name. Good for them. It’s always nice to see rich people in Seattle making more money. However, Amazon and Microsoft have obligations to their shareholders to turn a profit. Debian does not. Debian has its own obligations i.e. the Social Contract. If Microsoft or Amazon wants to use Debian as a component for its commercial activities, as Canonical does with Ubuntu, no problem. Moreover, if Amazon and Microsoft want to use Debian, they should have the same rights as any other Debian users. So it makes sense to be supportive of their use of Debian. At the same time, would it benefit Debian to dilute or judiciously interpret the Social Contract to ensure Amazon and Microsoft can benefit from Debian’s good name? Cooperation makes sense and is reflective of the social nature of Debian. But not at any cost. Simon
