Good to know. Thanks for the clarification.
Op 13/11/15 09:23 heeft Alexander Wirt <[email protected]> geschreven: >On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, Simon Hoare wrote: > >> 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. >Just to make it clear, all work on these azure images is done by longtime >debian developers and we only use software which already is in debian. > >Alex >
