Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Things have gotten muddled though and that's the problem. There's a > number of issues here:
Thanks for the fresh eyeballs. Here's my take: > 1) Holding money in the UK on behalf of Debian > 2) Selling t-shirts and whatnot > 3) The name issue with 'Debian-UK' > 4) The 'opt-out' membership > 5) The beer-bashes > 6) The bank account [...] 1, 3 and 6 can go together IMO. 4 should never happen for debian. 2 and 3 should not go together unless all businesses can use the name (perhaps with a reasonable and non-discriminatory(!) standard). That would be quite a shift from the old position, but may be welcome. I don't care about 5 either way, as long as it's clear to donors if grouped with 1 and people know what their money is spent on. There's also "public appearances as Debian" which should be avoided by licensees. > Businesses are not inherently evil but they do have different priorities > than Debian. I don't follow debian-uk and it certainly doesn't sound > like it's actually been resolved in an acceptable way regardless. I have no problem with business. I have worked for businesses since I was ~14, with a small break 1995-6 (I think). The "evil" thing was introduced to the thread by someone else, not me, but DUS is the first business I've been told I joined without asking! That may qualify as "evil" even if nothing else does... :-/ > [...] Certainly if Debian/SPI isn't going to do it then > Debian/SPI in other countries shouldn't either. That's what > Debian-UK comes across to me as- the UK branch of Debian. [...] http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info says "Debian does not sell any products" -- how did that come about? I can trace it back to Feb 1999 by James A. Treacy with a request for comments to go to debian-www, but I didn't find any comments there. Thanks, -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
