Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Aug 21, 10:04pm, David Puryear wrote: Since this is going around in a circle, please lets all drop it. Has anyone else noticed a lot of noise on this list lately from people with technical questions? Would it be too much to ask for them to move to their own list? -- Michael Hill Toronto, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 13:12:48 CDT, Rick Hawkins wrote: Dave Cinege wrote, Yes you have. I'm saying the work done be the people outside the US is now asscoiated with a US entity. It's not 'theirs' anymore, while it is in the US. this is not true, in any sense of the word. The difference between debian unincorporated or incorporated makes absolutley no difference in ownership, at least in the common law countries (US, britain, australia, etc.). If I make a package tonight, and submited it, am I then consider an employee (agent, memeber, whatever) of that corp? No, and therefor it means nothing to my liability. But since there is now a legal person called Debian we could both be brought into litigation. Before if someone did something, it was just them. To do anything to Debian meant going after all the seperate people involved. That's because no guy named Debian existednow he does Again, this is completely wrong. There was no protection from the absense of a debian the person. It would *not* have required going after all of the separate people involved. No you are wrong, and I firmly hold by my opinion. Unless you can provide me case law otherwise, you are the one with the opinion on shakey ground. An informal group of guys, that have no assests, makes no profit, makes no sellable product, and takes no risk, in no way can be considered a business, enterprise, joint venture et al. Can't happen! And that's what the law would require for anything to follow back to the 'members' (which there are no members cause in legal terms it did not exist) It would have been going after any single one, or any group, which was convenient. Each of whom would have been liable in the full amount of any judgment. If you make a package, you still face liability under either setup. However, incorporated you face no liability for my packages. That is the difference. You now have it bassackwards. Where as before it could not be followed back, be cause of no official assiciation, now with the advent of Debian Inc. it can. Now if we were all covered by the corporation, you would be correct, but currently we are not. What is would take to cover us all is a re structing of Debian in such a way that it becomes a commercial type (though not for profit) orginazation. (then you really need to worry about being sued) So guys make the Decision. Debian or Debian Inc.? We can't have both. If anything is done to this guy, the work the developers are 'giving' him are subject to any sanctions against him. Follow? It has created a liabity. again, this is wrong. see above. Also, developers do not give anything to debian; they license. They still own their packages. More of a reason they are not protected. What members? Debian never existed. There was no formal orginazation. No solid heiarchy. No dues. Again, this just doesn't matter. Debian did indeed exist, and did indeed have members, whether formally organized or not. It certainly does matter. You can't sue something that doesn't legally exist. The members themselves could be sued, but as I pointed out for it to follow back to all of them, it would have to be show that this group of guys the release software free to the internet, are a formal orginazation. If this is not the case then you can follow something back for anything. By your logic, if I write a peice of code for the linux kernel, and it turns out a kernel gets out with a virus and starts a suit, I can get sued even if I had no part in that code. Can't happen. Won't make it into court. There's simply no affilation. (Especially since it is released as source only) And please spare me the Well hey after you spend $$$ to prove it argument. That is our fucked up, sue happy, everyone owes me something society. Having the corp won't stop that. Even if the corporation in it's current state did provide full protectsion, it wouldn't stop someone from filing suit, and costing that indivigual out of pocket until they proved it was frivolous. (Unless Debian Inc. will start providing lawyers fees. With what money I have no idea) yes. Then they are each indivigually liable no matter what. They are. The corp just now officially puts them all in the same basket. this is where you are wrong. It is exactly the opposite: the corp takes them *out* of the basket. NOT the way it is set up now. You're working in generic terms, instead of the current state of things. Is there a Debian Inc? Yes. Do all the deb devs have some sort of formal (legally arguable) link to it now. Yes. Are they all part of it?(ie directly covered) No. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997 02:32:30 +0800, Dima wrote: OK Dave, here's a fresh one for you: remember LiGNUx? Here's what made him do that: Note that FSF is the same kind of corporation, a non-profit with a 501(c)3. And? - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On 22 Aug 1997 13:41:07 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: If you do not think that the discussion came to a conclusion (BTW, Bruce did shift from his original proposal), then the proper forum is debian-devel. I did not see your s=comments there. Nobody is squashing dissent. All we are saying that that's the way the developers want it. If you disagree, shift over to debian-devel and we shall attempt for consensus. Please point me to the thread where Revision control was decided to be backlogged. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
john wrote, This is the part that baffles me. Do you really believe that users who won't buy 1.3.1 because 1.3.2 is out will buy 1.3 revision 1 after 1.3 revision 2 comes out? actually, yes. I know the schemes are identical, but I think that revision off to the side doesn't sound as much like I'm not up to date! as a complete number. And those who do understand enough to know the difference will probably also know that they can download the couple of extra files. rick -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
my company uses Debian very seriously so I think is very fair to help the project with donations. I have just bought 2 Official Debian 1.3.1 CD's from LSL and I chose the product that includes a 5 dollar donation to the Debian project. And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? Personally, I'm glad to see Debian become a little more organized and getting incorporated. They didn't need to get incorpoated to become more orginized. The United States or any one of them has no interest in our international communal project. No, but others may. Incorproration is done mainly for protection. It makes a group an independant entity such that the people who work for it do not have to be jointly and severally liable for everything the group does. We may be an international organization, but that doesn't make one immune from attacks. It means that Debian can start paying it's own bills instead of people like Bruce going out of pocket to pay for the internic domain fees. Then tell him to rep a few CD-R's out and not pander an 'official' CD to high volume leach cookie cutters. Please. You make it sound like making some changes to increase Debian's viability in the world is a bad thing. On top of that, not everyone can donate time or resourses, but they can contribute money. To who? Am I a part of Debian.org? Do I have a vote.even if I maintain 50 packages?? You'll seethe cash will lead to bills created by the corp, that in turn will create more bills, and there by creating a relience on direct finacial support. The point is you CAN'T just donate money to Debian. 'Debian' is the efforts of several hundred people; it's not a physical thing. But it is a logical entity. There are central costs. This is what the money goes to. Were you asked if you wanted the version control change? No, we we're told that it was going to be changed, and purely for the sake of appesment of the larger CD makers. Debian is not about profit. The orginizes should not be worrying about it how many cd's they get sent outit obviously is interfering with the technical aspects of the project. It's not interfering with anything. Debian developers primarily concentrate on unstable. We're just trying to make stable a little more stable. Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. You do realize that you just proved Behan's point, right? It was, after all, you who originally sidetracked the issue. Let me quote you from above... And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? Now, let's all play nice and try to keep the bad language and name calling to a minimum. Disagreement is fine, but losing one's temper accomplishes nothing but make people fight against you just for the sake of fighting. Brian ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) --- Generated by Signify v1.02. For this and more, visit http://www.verisim.com/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Why change the version numbering scheme? It is a small change, it makes sense for marketing reasons, it is easy to do, and there was no reason not to do it. We're not holding up releases because of it. I suppose all 67 megs in bo-updates is being held there for some other reason? Actually, it's there because I've been on vacation. Also, most of the disk space is being used by one package set: x3.3 Now that I'm almost caught up at work, perhaps I can spend a little more time on coordinating how we're going to incorporate the necessary changes into Debian 1.3. Brian ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) --- In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
They could have not followed anything past the guy that caused it. Now they can. With all due respect, I think you have it backwards. Now, the corporation protects not just those beyond the guy that caused the problem. It even protects that particular guy. you are correct. However, were an individual programmer to incure liability (the only way I can think of off hand is by deliberately caused harm, such as sneaking in a disk eraser), the corporation won't protect that individual. It will, howver, protect the other developers, who could potentially face liability, or at least incur staggering defense costs. Generally, short of intentionally caused harm, I can't think of anything offhand that would lead to actual liability for unincorporated developers. However, the legal costs of being right aren't small. Given the incorporation, a suit against individual developers would probably be bounced, with sanctions fees, quickly. Without, they might have to defend on the merits. rick, esq. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Just wanted to say that I'm glad to be able to contribute the $5, delighted to have access to the developers, generally pleased with the spelling on the list, and although I may not agree with it, I'll defend Dave's right to be bounced. I'd like to direct my user-vote in favour of good behaviour since I for one don't begrudge Bruce the baby. Mike -- Michael Hill Toronto, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, just my two cents... Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : For those who care, the old scheme was to have revisions : called 2.0.1 etc, the new scheme calles them revisions. : old new : === === : 2.0.02.0 : 2.0.12.0 r1 : 2.0.22.0 r2 : : There are no fewer release. All releases are numbered (with : revisions, not point versions). Technically, the two schemes are the : same. Mr Cinege has escalated a percived, non-technical difference : into a jihad. And if we think about Bruce's words: So, we want to make it clear that our CD, even if it is a revision or two behind, is still _current_ product in that you can easily hit our FTP site and update it to the latest and greatest. We are separating the release number from the revision number to emphasize this fact. this makes sense. I don't see anything wrong with this versioning scheme, it's the same as before. However, I feel a litle bit unconfortable with the way things are arranged currently in FTP site: before, in the old 1.1 and 1.2 days it was very easy to find what was changed, I just had to go to buzz-updates or rex-updates and find there all the updated packages. Now, the bo-updates directory has packages that are being tested but are not part of the main distribution yet. When something is released it goes to bo (stable). I don't know, it just that I don't feel confortable with that... E.- -- Eloy A. Paris Information Technology Department Rockwell Automation de Venezuela Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9430323 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
And the people who contribute to it should decide the direction in which it goes. Did I miss the developer vote on the version numbering scheme change? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Dale Scheetz writes: Each revision will be properly noted. We aren't doing this for the benefit of CD makers. This is for the benefit of the end user (remember them?) who needs to be able to go to a local retailer and purchase the Debian distribution. If the CD manufacturer is forced to loose his shirt every time he tries to distribute this product, he is not likely to try again, and others who might have tried will be discouraged from the attempt. This is the part that baffles me. Do you really believe that users who won't buy 1.3.1 because 1.3.2 is out will buy 1.3 revision 1 after 1.3 revision 2 comes out? As much as we may dislike having such discussions, marketing issues must be addressed if this goal is to be met. And choosing a simple, consistent, and comprehensible release naming scheme is such an issue. Hambone, bopeep, 1.3.1, and now revision 2... all very confusing. I've been trying to convince the people in the seul project to use Debian: they think Debian is flaky. I like Debian. I use Debian. I'd contribute if I had the resources. But I'm beginning to agree with them. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Since this is going around in a circle, please lets all drop it. Thanks, David On 21-Aug-97 Dave Cinege wrote: ---cut--- Oh boy...is this going in a circle... ---cut--- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:12:59 -0400 (EDT), Dale Scheetz wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: It's not about .1 R1, or Asub1, to the 2nd power of 4. It's about something that is frozen, actully staying frozen. If the disc says 1.3.1, I should be able crccheck the whole damn thing against the master 1.3.1 dist, and have it come up clean. Right NOW you can't even do that, Not true! 1.3.1 is a fixed object, available as an Official image. It hasn't changed since its release, and, to the best of my knowledge, will not ever change. Bruce Perens: The next version of the system will be called Debian 1.3.1 Revision 1. People who make long-term products based on Debian requested that we not change the version number of the system if we were only making a few bug fixes. For example, X windows was rebuilt because Richard Stallman requested that XDM display Debian GNU/Linux rather than just Debian Linux. It's worthwhile to insert that change, but not worthwhile to make everyone think they need to upgrade their systems because of it. Thus, we will not bump the release number to 1.3.2 for minor changes. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On 21 Aug 1997 16:08:05 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: There are no fewer release. All releases are numbered (with revisions, not point versions). Technically, the two schemes are the same. Mr Cinege has escalated a percived, non-technical difference into a jihad. No I'm talking about the same revs conatining differences. Something that the developers are conviently ignoring. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On 21 Aug 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dale Scheetz writes: Each revision will be properly noted. We aren't doing this for the benefit of CD makers. This is for the benefit of the end user (remember them?) who needs to be able to go to a local retailer and purchase the Debian distribution. If the CD manufacturer is forced to loose his shirt every time he tries to distribute this product, he is not likely to try again, and others who might have tried will be discouraged from the attempt. This is the part that baffles me. Do you really believe that users who won't buy 1.3.1 because 1.3.2 is out will buy 1.3 revision 1 after 1.3 revision 2 comes out? As much as we may dislike having such discussions, marketing issues must be addressed if this goal is to be met. And choosing a simple, consistent, and comprehensible release naming scheme is such an issue. Hambone, bopeep, 1.3.1, and now revision 2... all very confusing. I've been trying to convince the people in the seul project to use Debian: they think Debian is flaky. I like Debian. I use Debian. I'd contribute if I had the resources. But I'm beginning to agree with them. Good point, John. It seems that the sugar-coated explanation still doesn't taste very good. Hey, users who are listening - Debian 1.3.3 is out but it's still called 1.3.1 so nobody who buys those CD sets will feel inferior? We need someone with a Ph.D. in policy analysis to convince us that it really does taste good. Why don't we just call it Debian GNU/Linux 1.3.1.your_lucky_number? +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:30:52 -0500, Paul Serice wrote: The government has always been involved. In general though, it is With the developers and servers in Germany? nl? The presence of developers and servers in Germany does not limit the ability of the American legal system to reach the developers in the U.S. So, yes, despite developers in Germany, the government is, and always has been, involved. Think of the loop-hole if all you had to do was set up an office in Germany to avoid U.S. jurisdiction over persons and things in the U.S. This is such an obvious response, I fear I'm missing your point though. Yes you have. I'm saying the work done be the people outside the US is now asscoiated with a US entity. It's not 'theirs' anymore, while it is in the US. state law, not federal, that controls, and (if I remember correctly) most states impose personal liability (as in they come and take away your house and car) for unorganized groups such as Debian was. They could have not followed anything past the guy that caused it. Now they can. With all due respect, I think you have it backwards. Now, the corporation protects not just those beyond the guy that caused the problem. It even protects that particular guy. If I make a package tonight, and submited it, am I then consider an employee (agent, memeber, whatever) of that corp? No, and therefor it means nothing to my liability. But since there is now a legal person called Debian we could both be brought into litigation. Before if someone did something, it was just them. To do anything to Debian meant going after all the seperate people involved. That's because no guy named Debian existednow he does If anything is done to this guy, the work the developers are 'giving' him are subject to any sanctions against him. Follow? It has created a liabity. Before though, in most states at least, anyone wronged by the unincorporated organization could have followed anything past the guy that caused it to all the other members. The other members only recourse would be against the guy who caused it; however, the members would still be liable directly to the injured party. What members? Debian never existed. There was no formal orginazation. No solid heiarchy. No dues. No finacial tranactions with the Debian name. (at least there should not have been) That's the way it works, and that's the way it should work. A group of people cannot avoid liability by refusing to incorporate, and as soon as the group does incorporate, the law kicks in and makes certain requirements of the corporation, e.g., that it not be undercapitalized, for the benefit of third parties who deal with the entity. Phooey. Do all the developers hold there own copyright? Huh? Do they? Then they are each indivigually liable no matter what. The corp just now officially puts them all in the same basket. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Paul Wade wrote: Good point, John. It seems that the sugar-coated explanation still doesn't taste very good. Hey, users who are listening - Debian 1.3.3 is out but it's still called 1.3.1 so nobody who buys those CD sets will feel inferior? We need someone with a Ph.D. in policy analysis to convince us that it really does taste good. Why don't we just call it Debian GNU/Linux 1.3.1.your_lucky_number? Sorry friend, but this is false. 1.3.1 is out. The few changes that have been made to it were done so in error. I believe that resulted from Guy's absense. But, mistakes will be made occaisionally in any case. None of the packages in bo-updates have been released into the official distribution. In case you haven't noticed, we've been trying to implement some new quality control procedures with 1.3, and it's up to the testing manager, Dale, to approve the packages before they go into the main distribution. This is the first time we've tried this, and it looks like bo-updates was the wrong name for the updates that are not yet approved by the testing group. Syrus. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED]UCSD Physics Dept. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote: On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Paul Wade wrote: Good point, John. It seems that the sugar-coated explanation still doesn't taste very good. Hey, users who are listening - Debian 1.3.3 is out but it's still called 1.3.1 so nobody who buys those CD sets will feel inferior? We need someone with a Ph.D. in policy analysis to convince us that it really does taste good. Why don't we just call it Debian GNU/Linux 1.3.1.your_lucky_number? Sorry friend, but this is false. 1.3.1 is out. The few changes that have been made to it were done so in error. I believe that resulted from Guy's ^ Then they should have been reversed. If they were done in error, where was the warning message to prevent people from using the 'bad' Debian? absense. But, mistakes will be made occaisionally in any case. None of the packages in bo-updates have been released into the official distribution. In case you haven't noticed, we've been trying to implement some new quality control procedures with 1.3, and it's up to the testing manager, Dale, to approve the packages before they go into the main distribution. This is the first time we've tried this, and it looks like bo-updates was the wrong name for the updates that are not yet approved by ^^^ the testing group. That is a bit of an understatement. The readme file in that directory is not entirely clear to many people. It sounds like it should have been called bo-whataretheseanyway. +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clint Adams) Did I miss the developer vote on the version numbering scheme change? A while ago we held a vote on the leadership of the project. The developers strongly rejected the idea of a Roman Senate where all decisions would be voted upon. They prefered to have an elected executive and ratified me to hold that position and appoint other positions. I have held votes since then when I felt that form of feedback from the developers was necessary. However the only one I am required to hold is the annual vote for project leader. The sense of the developers was that design-by-comittee could go wrong and that a strong leader was necessary to guide the group. Excuse me for bragging, but we've been incredibly successful under my leadership :-) Want the job? It's available January 1. I'll decide whether I'm running or not depending on who the candidates are. Let me warn you that it's a really difficult job, it takes hours of your life every day, the pay stinks, and you get lots of abuse. Thanks Bruce -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Paul Wade wrote: [snip] Then they should have been reversed. If they were done in error, where was the warning message to prevent people from using the 'bad' Debian? Once again, our regular archive maintainer, who is not paid for his time, is on vacation. You sure want to treat us like a commercial corporation, dont' you: Where's the immediate service? Come on guys, you better fix mistakes in the archive before they happen! What, you have to work for a living too? No excuse! You better make me a perfect distribution now! Syrus. P.S. I'm serious, just like they used to tell me on the playground in pre-school. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED]UCSD Physics Dept. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] And choosing a simple, consistent, and comprehensible release naming scheme is such an issue. Hambone, bopeep, 1.3.1, and now revision 2... all very confusing. I've been trying to convince the people in the seul project to use Debian: they think Debian is flaky. We just chose a naming scheme. Our previous one gave people the impression that Debian came out with a new release every month, which was enough to make anyone think we were flaky. Hamm and Bo are code-names. The reasons we use them have to do with FTP mirrors not responding well to moving directories containing 1GB of files. We want to have a name like bo before 1.3 comes out, and only name it 1.3 once the release has been made. Back in the 1.0 development we called it 1.0 during development, and the non-working prototype ended up on an Infomagic CD. Never again. What is the seul project? Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
From: George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] maybe debian should just put the updates in a directory called 1.3-updates and not use symlinks to point updates packages to the updates from the base 1.3 tree. Guy Maor, the person who does the work of maintaining the archive, rejected the above scheme. He felt that putting the updates in the directory with the rest of the system was better, and he is the person who does the work so I let him decide. He used to maintain the updates directory and a bunch of symlinks so that you had a directory containing the original system with the updates overlaid upon it, and he says it was a big hassle and confused lots of users. This would make mirroring easier as the 1.3 tree would (in theory) never change and mirrors would only have to keep the 1.3-updates directory up to date. I think the intent is that you let dselect do the FTP for you. Thanks Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Bruce, On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clint Adams) Did I miss the developer vote on the version numbering scheme change? A while ago we held a vote on the leadership of the project. The developers strongly rejected the idea of a Roman Senate where all decisions would be voted upon. They prefered to have an elected executive and ratified me to hold that position and appoint other positions. I have held votes since then when I felt that form of feedback from the developers was necessary. However the only one I am required to hold is the annual vote for project leader. The sense of the developers was that design-by-comittee could go wrong and that a strong leader was necessary to guide the group. Excuse me for bragging, but we've been incredibly successful under my leadership :-) Want the job? It's available January 1. I'll decide whether I'm running or not depending on who the candidates are. Let me warn you that it's a really difficult job, it takes hours of your life every day, the pay stinks, and you get lots of abuse. On the other hand, of course, you can look back with pride on what has been achieved, knowing that you have a lot of friends out there. I'm about as far as one can get from the action, so maybe I don't know what is going on, or maybe I can see it clearer. I dunno. But from here it seems that Debian has been extremely fortunate in its choice of leader. You have shown a remarkable capacity to see the big picture and to be able to guide us in the right direction while contributing at the same time to the nuts and bolts of our OS. I have also noted in the past your broad shoulders and your ability to shrug off ill informed criticism. (I remember your comment some time back about the job fitting you for a career in politics.) So I am just going to wait and hope that you do stand for the job again next year. Your contribution is very much appreciated. I'll stand you dinner and a bottle of claret next time you venture to my QTH. :-) Lindsay vk6lj =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Lindsay Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perth, Western Australia voice +61 8 9316 2486modem +61 8 9364-9832 32S, 116E =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
The new version naming scheme and control is based on politics and not technical reasons. Until now, I didn't notice any decrease in functionality. If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings CD-Rom, they could get back to simply working towards the orginazation of a quality product. Thats their purpose as far as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers can keep their stock up to date. AFAIK, people do _work_ on this _product_ in their free time. I don't feel to have any moral right to tell them, how they should spend it. If all or some of them would decide to dedicate this time to commercial actions, I'll have to accept this, as they are free to do so. BTW, as soon as you are talking about a product, you're introducing commercial concepts. -- Ciccio C. Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 21:52:43 +0200, Ciccio wrote: If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings CD-Rom, they could get back to simply working towards the orginazation of a quality product. Thats their purpose as far as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers can keep their stock up to date. AFAIK, people do _work_ on this _product_ in their free time. I don't feel to have any moral right to tell them, how they should spend it. When they are acting as the official Debian entity you do! - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
George B.: I suppose that my point was that after a distribution expires from the ftp site, if the updates directory could remain, a person with an older cdrom could still possibly update to a newer version. If they have an X.x cdrom, they select X.x-updates then upgrade to the current system from there. You could try lobbying Guy Maor (gently, please). But there has to be a date beyond even updates for an old release get purged. We want the mirror space for more current stuff, and with $4 CDs nobody has much of an excuse for missing upgrades any more. Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
George Bonser writes: I think the idea is, you buy the 1.3 CDROM and pick up the revisions from the net. ... In this way, if a distribution goes defunct and is replaced, only the X.x-updates directory needs to be left around for people that might want to update a disk that is a couple of revs behind current. Excellent idea. Just add a script for the user to run to automatically update their installed packages and you've got a really slick system. However, it was my understanding that the change from x.y.z to x.y revision z was purely cosmetic. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On 21 Aug 1997 23:28:31 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George Bonser writes: I think the idea is, you buy the 1.3 CDROM and pick up the revisions from the net. ... In this way, if a distribution goes defunct and is replaced, only the X.x-updates directory needs to be left around for people that might want to update a disk that is a couple of revs behind current. Excellent idea. Just add a script for the user to run to automatically update their installed packages and you've got a really slick system. If you have a net connection. If you are only working from one machine. Then it doesn't matter. If I have to s=do several machines I order an current rev CD-R. The problem is I can;t be sure exactly what I will be getting. Is it 1.3.1 R2 from this week, or from last week. What about next week? However, it was my understanding that the change from x.y.z to x.y revision z was purely cosmetic. Apparently not. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:12:59 -0400 (EDT), Dale Scheetz wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: It's not about .1 R1, or Asub1, to the 2nd power of 4. It's about something that is frozen, actully staying frozen. If the disc says 1.3.1, I should be able crccheck the whole damn thing against the master 1.3.1 dist, and have it come up clean. Right NOW you can't even do that, Not true! 1.3.1 is a fixed object, available as an Official image. It hasn't changed since its release, and, to the best of my knowledge, will not ever change. Bruce Perens: The next version of the system will be called Debian 1.3.1 Revision 1. People who make long-term products based on Debian requested that we not change the version number of the system if we were only making a few bug fixes. For example, X windows was rebuilt because Richard Stallman requested that XDM display Debian GNU/Linux rather than just Debian Linux. It's worthwhile to insert that change, but not worthwhile to make everyone think they need to upgrade their systems because of it. Thus, we will not bump the release number to 1.3.2 for minor changes. So? What's the problem. Instead of calling the next release 1.3.2 it will be called 1.3.1 R1. No less distinct, but in a form the retailers will, hopefully, not baulk at. Your complaints seem to be based on a misunderstanding. Luck, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Bruce Perens wrote: You could try lobbying Guy Maor (gently, please). But there has to be a date beyond even updates for an old release get purged. We want the mirror space for more current stuff, and with $4 CDs nobody has much of an excuse for missing upgrades any more. What are the implications of these words Bruce? I hope Debian stays dedicated to providing an easy upgrade path across several major releases. Just because it is now _possible_ to upgrade about monthly from a cd doesn't mean that everybody who doesn't (for whatever reason) needs an excuse for that. I think that I just misread the intention of your words, but I still wish to express my concern about this issue. Joost -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
First let me say Bruce, you've done a great job in the past, and I realize it's been no easy task. You've taken a lot of uncalled for flack recently, mostly due to misconceptions and pointless debates. When the time comes, I hope you decide to continue as the project leader. On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: On 21 Aug 1997 23:28:31 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George Bonser writes: I think the idea is, you buy the 1.3 CDROM and pick up the revisions from the net. ... In this way, if a distribution goes defunct and is replaced, only the X.x-updates directory needs to be left around for people that might want to update a disk that is a couple of revs behind current. Excellent idea. Just add a script for the user to run to automatically update their installed packages and you've got a really slick system. If you have a net connection. If you are only working from one machine. Then it doesn't matter. If I have to s=do several machines I order an current rev CD-R. The problem is I can;t be sure exactly what I will be getting. Is it 1.3.1 R2 from this week, or from last week. What about next week? a) If you don't have a net connection, what difference does it make if you have r 1 or 2 or 3. They are only minor bug fixes only (I'm not sure if major bug fixes constitue a new distribution number). b) If you are so concerned as to what release you get, get it from a cd-r seller. I have a feeling major cd makers will release 2.0, and never 2.0 r1. c) Packages within the release don't change. A set of packages is left for testing, and once we have enough packages, a release is made and the remaining packages are left till the next release. The actual implementation is being discussed elsewhere, and once something is decided upon, I'm sure everyone will be informed. If someone has _actual proof_ of this statement being wrong, please correct me. However, it was my understanding that the change from x.y.z to x.y revision z was purely cosmetic. Apparently not. Then I don't think you understand the change. I didn't understand it myself at first, but Bruce informed me of the method of revisions, and this has since been posted on the list in a clearer way. Why are you so upset about this? If it's that big of a deal, go make your own distribution. Everything seems to be working fine with this one. If you aren't going to contribute to debian, please don't make it your goal to disrupt what we have done. I guess the analogy I'm trying to make is: when you get a birthday cake with white icing, do you throw a fit because it's not chocolate? Be happy that someone made you a cake, in fact you should be thanking them for it. There are times when a criticism will help us grow. I don't think this is one of those times. Thanks to Bruce and all the other developers who have put together this wonderful distribution. Brandon -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Manoj Srivastava wrote: Dave If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings Dave CD-Rom, they could get back to simply working towards the Dave orginazation of a quality product. Thats their purpose as far Dave as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers can keep their Dave stock up to date. Then you are naive. The best product (Betamax,apple) can die out if absolutely no effort is made to promote it. And it is not as if we decided on a technically inferior naming scheme. Actually, there was a third standard - Video 2000 by Philips. Here at philips, it is said to be even better than Betamax. Then why doesn't the world know about it? Well, it is rumored here that when the first video devices were marketed there were only few titles available. Philips refused to support the production of x-rated videos, while for Sony's standard a plethora of porn was soon available. The porn was exactly what made the videos sell, because seriously, who would pay $4000 just to be able to watch Bambi (the Disney one ;-) at home? Gradually more regular titles became available and over time the x-rated segment became marginal. When marketprices dropped, only the VHS machines were profitable, because of the volume advantage gained from the early days. The point I am trying to make is mostly to tell some nice folklore. But hey, don't you folks see the analogy * porn -- ms apps * ? If Debian could provide an easy way to run WinWord6 and similar stuff (I'm thinking of the willows libraries) then it would be taken _very_ seriously by many business-people. Just look at all the Office software that Microsoft sold and that they're not willing to support anymore. As I see it, the apps are the single most important reason for people to use Microsoft Windows. Some may think this is all too immoral, but I think that if Debian gets a bigger corporate userbase, then there will also be many more people employed to work with debian. A lot of them will make fine developers or otherwise practical supporters of the free Debian distribution. Joost -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Joost == Joost Kooij [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Joost The point I am trying to make is mostly to tell some nice Joost folklore. But hey, don't you folks see the analogy * porn Joost -- ms apps * ? This is the funniest thing I've ever heard. -- Brought to you by the letters P and G and the number 6. He's like.. some sort of.. non-giving up.. school guy! -- Bart Simpson Ben Gertzfield http://www.imsa.edu/~wilwonka/ Finger me for my public PGP key. I'm on FurryMUCK as Che, and EFNet and YiffNet IRC as Che_Fox. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: keep their stock up to date. AFAIK, people do _work_ on this _product_ in their free time. I don't feel to have any moral right to tell them, how they should spend it. Dave When they are acting as the official Debian entity you do! What exactly gives you the right to impose your views on Debian? manoj -- Never try to catch two frogs with one hand. Chinese Proverb Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
The presence of developers and servers in Germany does not limit the ability of the American legal system to reach the developers in the U.S. So, yes, despite developers in Germany, the government is, and always has been, involved. Think of the loop-hole if all you had to do was set up an office in Germany to avoid U.S. jurisdiction over persons and things in the U.S. This is such an obvious response, I fear I'm missing your point though. Yes you have. I'm saying the work done be the people outside the US is now asscoiated with a US entity. It's not 'theirs' anymore, while it is in the US. O.k., I think I see where you're coming from. That's just not the way it works! First, those folks freely associate their work with Debian. Second, their work is still theirs unless and until they assign the copyright to, for example, Debian -- which I understand is not done. Until the copyright is assigned, they get the same international protection as any other copyright holder, and the work is still theirs. As an anarchist, surely you understand that all property is a creature of the state that creates and recognizes it. Thus, either before or after incorporation, the only reason their work is still theirs inside the United States is because the U.S. recognizes and is willing to enforce their rights. So, even if you are right, being associated with a US entity in the US is likely to give rise to more property rights, not fewer. What I'm trying to tell you is that anarchy requires the abolition of personal property, and for you to care one way or the other about such property is, well, hypocritical. Perhaps you're actually a nihilist. If you would like to take this anarchy discussion off the list, I'll be happy to oblige. If I make a package tonight, and submited it, am I then consider an employee (agent, memeber, whatever) of that corp? O.k., this is the right question. No, and therefor it means nothing to my liability. But, this is the wrong answer. Here's a hint, when you are dealing with legal problems, the answer is almost always, Well, it depends. No attorney is going to be bullied away from a lawsuit by your ipse dixit that you have no liability especially when perfectly good theories exist for making you pay, e.g., under partnership law, as a joint venture, or under some other theory relating to purely social organization about which I know nothing. Never mind the good theories. What about the bad ones that succeed. For example, now, (unless things have changed) they can get abortion protestors under RICO -- a federal racketerring law. You just never know. It's hard for any attorney in the planning stages to anticipate such a theory. Actually, if you made a package tonight, it wouldn't matter because the corporation would shield you from liability. Why is the concept of limited liability hard for you to understand? The only way to get general limited liability is to ask for it, and you ask for it by forming the right type of entity. That's the way it works, and that's the way it should work. A group of people cannot avoid liability by refusing to incorporate, and as soon as the group does incorporate, the law kicks in and makes certain requirements of the corporation, e.g., that it not be undercapitalized, for the benefit of third parties who deal with the entity. Phooey. Do all the developers hold there own copyright? Huh? Do they? Then they are each indivigually liable no matter what. The corp just now officially puts them all in the same basket. Copyright law has absolutely nothing to do with liability (aka torts, contracts, property law, and even criminal law; but, for crying out loud, not copyright law). Having or not having a copyright has no bearing whatsoever on the scope of liability (unless, of course, you're suing because of copyright infringement which is not what we're talking about). I have no Earthly clue how these two topics have become confused in your head. Is there some sort of treaty of which I'm not aware that says, if you keep (or don't keep) your software copyright, you are free and clear of personal liability for the torts you commit, like beating someone senseless or causing an automobile accident? The proposition is silly. And, to answer your question, yes, (unless I'm mistaken) all the developers hold their own copyrights unless they have specifically said otherwise. In short, you are no longer under an onus to specifically reserve your copyright. Like I said though, it is irrelevant to what we're talking about. Paul Serice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
A while ago we held a vote on the leadership of the project. The developers strongly rejected the idea of a Roman Senate where all decisions would be voted upon. They prefered to have an elected executive and ratified me to As did I. However, I think it's slightly stretching the point to claim that we, the developers decided something which was an executive decision following a developer discussion with no clear consensus. Even more troubling, though, are the calls to squelch dissent because of it. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Dave Cinege wrote, Yes you have. I'm saying the work done be the people outside the US is now asscoiated with a US entity. It's not 'theirs' anymore, while it is in the US. this is not true, in any sense of the word. The difference between debian unincorporated or incorporated makes absolutley no difference in ownership, at least in the common law countries (US, britain, australia, etc.). If I make a package tonight, and submited it, am I then consider an employee (agent, memeber, whatever) of that corp? No, and therefor it means nothing to my liability. But since there is now a legal person called Debian we could both be brought into litigation. Before if someone did something, it was just them. To do anything to Debian meant going after all the seperate people involved. That's because no guy named Debian existednow he does Again, this is completely wrong. There was no protection from the absense of a debian the person. It would *not* have required going after all of the separate people involved. It would have been going after any single one, or any group, which was convenient. Each of whom would have been liable in the full amount of any judgment. If you make a package, you still face liability under either setup. However, incorporated you face no liability for my packages. That is the difference. If anything is done to this guy, the work the developers are 'giving' him are subject to any sanctions against him. Follow? It has created a liabity. again, this is wrong. see above. Also, developers do not give anything to debian; they license. They still own their packages. What members? Debian never existed. There was no formal orginazation. No solid heiarchy. No dues. Again, this just doesn't matter. Debian did indeed exist, and did indeed have members, whether formally organized or not. Phooey. Do all the developers hold there own copyright? Huh? Do they? yes. Then they are each indivigually liable no matter what. They are. The corp just now officially puts them all in the same basket. this is where you are wrong. It is exactly the opposite: the corp takes them *out* of the basket. rick, esq. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
OK Dave, here's a fresh one for you: remember LiGNUx? Here's what made him do that: Note that FSF is the same kind of corporation, a non-profit with a 501(c)3. :) -- Dimitri emaziuk at curtin dot edu dot au Please CC to me when replying to Usenet or a list -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, Clint == Clint Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A while ago we held a vote on the leadership of the project. The developers strongly rejected the idea of a Roman Senate where all decisions would be voted upon. They prefered to have an elected executive and ratified me to Clint As did I. However, I think it's slightly stretching the point Clint to claim that we, the developers decided something which was Clint an executive decision following a developer discussion with no Clint clear consensus. Even more troubling, though, are the calls to Clint squelch dissent because of it. If you do not think that the discussion came to a conclusion (BTW, Bruce did shift from his original proposal), then the proper forum is debian-devel. I did not see your s=comments there. Nobody is squashing dissent. All we are saying that that's the way the developers want it. If you disagree, shift over to debian-devel and we shall attempt for consensus. manoj -- Saint: A dead sinner revised and edited. Ambrose Bierce Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Bruce writes: Hamm and Bo are code-names. I understand that. I understand what they are and what they do. What I do not understand is why you think that a newbie who just installed 1.3 and has gone to the ftp site to upgrade it will be able to make any sense out of names like bo-updates. IMHO the codes names should be used as little as possible. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, john == john [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: john I understand that. I understand what they are and what they do. john What I do not understand is why you think that a newbie who just john installed 1.3 and has gone to the ftp site to upgrade it will be john able to make any sense out of names like bo-updates. Good. And rightly so. Newbies should not be messing with update candidates which could still be buggy. When the candidates are approved, they shall be referenced in a manner easy for newbies to access. john IMHO the codes names should be used as little as possible. Quite. manoj -- Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. Ambrose Bierce Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote Rev each change and I'm happy enough to be quite. This is the only reason I started yelling, I still feel it is a good one. Yes, well, I'm suggesting you should shut up regardless. Everyone could stop beating up on him also. Aside from all the nasty stuff (which admitadly his original tone may have instigated), I have found the thread to be informative and his points deserving of consideration. Mike. -- Don't touch that! It's the History Eraser Button Britton -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: my company uses Debian very seriously so I think is very fair to help the project with donations. I have just bought 2 Official Debian 1.3.1 CD's from LSL and I chose the product that includes a 5 dollar donation to the Debian project. And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your books public Bruce? The purpose behind the official incorporation for Debian is still beyand me, and the more I think about it I don't like it. The project (like linux) has always been for freeholders all over the world. Why the US government suddenly has to get involded, I have no idea. Why does Debian need to be an artificial US government privedged entiy? It's our OS. We collectivly own it. Why do we suddenly need permission from someone to exists I'm sure some of the other anarchists here are also wondering about these things - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: my company uses Debian very seriously so I think is very fair to help the project with donations. I have just bought 2 Official Debian 1.3.1 CD's from LSL and I chose the product that includes a 5 dollar donation to the Debian project. And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your books public Bruce? Check the donations page. It will show what has been collected. The only expense that we have incurred to this point has been the fees generated by the incorporation process, less than $600. Tim -- (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] / (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.buoy.com/~tps The quality of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. G.B. Shaw ** Disclaimer: My views/comments/beliefs, as strange as they are, are my own.** -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:51:09 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your books public Bruce? Check the donations page. It will show what has been collected. The only expense that we have incurred to this point has been the fees generated by the incorporation process, less than $600. Why was this incorporation necessary? - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:51:09 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your books public Bruce? Check the donations page. It will show what has been collected. The only expense that we have incurred to this point has been the fees generated by the incorporation process, less than $600. Why was this incorporation necessary? One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Tim -- (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] / (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.buoy.com/~tps Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are Crunchy, and good with Catsup! ** Disclaimer: My views/comments/beliefs, as strange as they are, are my own.** -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Dave Cinege wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: my company uses Debian very seriously so I think is very fair to help the project with donations. I have just bought 2 Official Debian 1.3.1 CD's from LSL and I chose the product that includes a 5 dollar donation to the Debian project. And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? Personally, I'm glad to see Debian become a little more organized and getting incorporated. It means that Debian can start paying it's own bills instead of people like Bruce going out of pocket to pay for the internic domain fees. There are many little expenses that need to be paid, far more than either you or I can probably imagine. Organizing 200+ contributors is not an easy feat, especially with no budget. On top of that, not everyone can donate time or resourses, but they can contribute money. Why not allow them to do such? It is their choice. Debian is not asking for donations, yet people send donations anyways. Why do you feel that this way of contributing to the project should be stopped? Whether you're donating time, resources, or cash, it all boils down to contributing money. Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Behan -- Behan Webster mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-613-224-7547 http://www.verisim.com/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:51:09 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses What's going wrong now? does it have? Can you make your books public Bruce? Check the donations page. It will show what has been collected. The only expense that we have incurred to this point has been the fees generated by the incorporation process, less than $600. Why was this incorporation necessary? - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/Linux Router Project I'm using debian quite heavily, and nobody asked me to pay, so I didn't. Why should I bother what happens to the money of other people? I don't know personally any of the mayor debian activists, but I like the work they do. So why should I think they're trying to do something less honorable? Others use the list to announce their products, and while this consists just in two lines, I think that's OK. Why always suppose the worst? If anybody destroys the debian project, we just shoot him, that's OK too ;-) -- Ciccio C. Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:57:33 +0200, Ciccio wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:51:09 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive cash donations. What expenses What's going wrong now? I'm using debian quite heavily, and nobody asked me to pay, so I didn't. Why should I bother what happens to the money of other people? I don't know personally any of the mayor debian activists, but I like the work they do. So why should I think they're trying to do something less honorable? The new version naming scheme and control is based on politics and not technical reasons. If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings CD-Rom, they could get back to simply working towards the orginazation of a quality product. Thats their purpose as far as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers can keep their stock up to date. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... I don't see the need. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
At 02:00 PM 8/21/97 -0400, Dave Cinege wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... I don't see the need. What about people who would like to donate with the tax write off? Why should that avenue be blocked because it won't help everyone involved? As long as it does not actually hinder people, what's wrong with adding benefits to those who donate. Marc -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... I don't see the need. Well, many others did. And many others agreed with the other changes you disagree with. These decisions have been made. The time for discussion is _over_, unless you've got something more substantial than the pot-shots you've been taking so far. If you feel these changes make it impossible for you to use Debian, we're sorry, but it looks like the time has come for you to move to another distribution or start your own or whatever. If these changes do not make it impossible for you to use Debian, then please come up with something substantial enough that it might actually make people reconsider (I'll give you a clue, I don't see the need ain't likely to work---obviously the others did) or *drop it*. Mike. -- Don't touch that! It's the History Eraser Button -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote:
If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings CD-Rom, they
could get back to simply working towards the orginazation of a quality
product.
Thats their purpose as far as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers
can
keep their stock up to date.
I think that _anything_ that helps make Debian more mainstream and
available to new users is worthwhile as long as it doesn't compromise the
inherent stability and usefullness of the Debian distribution.
I say this not from a We are Hackers of Debian; Prepare to be
Assimilated or Let's take over the planet standpoint, but because in
order to get more commercially-available software into Debian
format/compatibility, we need to make the distribution commercially
viable. It'd be nice if eventually you could download netscape3024.deb
or get the newest release of your favorite
{game;utility;screensaver;officesuite} in Linux (esp. Debian) ala Quake or
Wordperfect Linux.
But it won't happen unless people are convinced that linux is a workable,
commercially-viable alternative to products from Gates, Inc. I think
Debian's the best shot it's got.
Will
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/
For PGP Public Key, visit my website.
---
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 12:42:02 -0400, Behan Webster wrote: Dave Cinege wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: my company uses Debian very seriously so I think is very fair to help the project with donations. I have just bought 2 Official Debian 1.3.1 CD's from LSL and I chose the product that includes a 5 dollar donation to the Debian project. And since I am in such a pissed off mood over these version number let's start on these donations. Where do they go and what are they used for? Personally, I'm glad to see Debian become a little more organized and getting incorporated. They didn't need to get incorpoated to become more orginized. The United States or any one of them has no interest in our international communal project. It means that Debian can start paying it's own bills instead of people like Bruce going out of pocket to pay for the internic domain fees. Then tell him to rep a few CD-R's out and not pander an 'official' CD to high volume leach cookie cutters. There are many little expenses that need to be paid, far more than either you or I can probably imagine. Organizing 200+ contributors is not an easy feat, especially with no budget. Bahh. It's part of our way of life. It's like saying my projects incur the cost of my internet accessit's something I would have anyway, and couldn't live without. If cost (besides in time) are getting noticly more then what he does for himself, it's time to bring in another person to help share the load. On top of that, not everyone can donate time or resourses, but they can contribute money. To who? Am I a part of Debian.org? Do I have a vote.even if I maintain 50 packages?? You'll seethe cash will lead to bills created by the corp, that in turn will create more bills, and there by creating a relience on direct finacial support. The point is you CAN'T just donate money to Debian. 'Debian' is the efforts of several hundred people; it's not a physical thing. Why not allow them to do such? It is their choice. Debian is not asking for donations, yet people send donations anyways. Why do you feel that this way of contributing to the project should be stopped? Whether you're donating time, resources, or cash, it all boils down to contributing money. No it does not. It would be hard to put a monetary figure on the badwidth donated by ftp sites. This is the only real need the Debian *developers* require. What this corpoation is doing, why it even is I still don't understand. It doesn't represent the people behind Debian. It doesn't offer them any protections. All it does is create an expense, where there was none. And that expense creates a desire to get money from the project, where there was none. Were you asked if you wanted the version control change? No, we we're told that it was going to be changed, and purely for the sake of appesment of the larger CD makers. Debian is not about profit. The orginizes should not be worrying about it how many cd's they get sent outit obviously is interfering with the technical aspects of the project. Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 12:42:02 -0400, Behan Webster wrote: Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. Resorting to vulgarities on a public mailing list should get you bounced from the list. Like Behan said, grow up. Tim -- (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] / (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.buoy.com/~tps Madness takes its toll... Please have exact change! ** Disclaimer: My views/comments/beliefs, as strange as they are, are my own.** -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. and of what harm? if there's enough interest from outside the US (in donations, not in usage) there's no reason related steps couldn't be taken. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... guess again. Partial usage for charitable concerns could be deducted. However, the entire machine network costs are probably already deducted as business expenses. rick, esq. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:34:29 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 12:42:02 -0400, Behan Webster wrote: Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. Resorting to vulgarities on a public mailing list should get you bounced from the list. Like Behan said, grow up. Then fuck you too. Bounce me. Weld you're power to stifle my 'bad' speech. Dare you use your filter instead. Sic semper tyrannis! - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:19:55 -0400, Marc W. Brooks wrote: At 02:00 PM 8/21/97 -0400, Dave Cinege wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... I don't see the need. What about people who would like to donate with the tax write off? Why should that avenue be blocked because it won't help everyone involved? As long as it does not actually hinder people, what's wrong with adding benefits to those who donate. They don't have it yet. If they get it, how peope can use it will be limited. In most case it won't even be feesable - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:34:29 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: In your email to me, Dave Cinege, you wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 12:42:02 -0400, Behan Webster wrote: Personally I think you're blowing things way out of proportion simply because you can't have things your way. Venting this anger by trying to imply that donated money is somehow being mispent is just plain childish. Grow up. Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. Resorting to vulgarities on a public mailing list should get you bounced from the list. Like Behan said, grow up. Then fuck you too. Bounce me. Weld you're power to stifle my 'bad' speech. Dare you use your filter instead. I have no such power. -- (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] / (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.buoy.com/~tps Madness takes its toll... Please have exact change! ** Disclaimer: My views/comments/beliefs, as strange as they are, are my own.** -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
At 02:56 PM 8/21/97 -0400, Dave Cinege wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:19:55 -0400, Marc W. Brooks wrote: What about people who would like to donate with the tax write off? Why should that avenue be blocked because it won't help everyone involved? As long as it does not actually hinder people, what's wrong with adding benefits to those who donate. They don't have it yet. If they get it, how peope can use it will be limited. In most case it won't even be feesable Okay, I'm not sure where we disagree then. You admit that In most cases it won't even be feasible, but this also means that in some cases, it would be feasible. Why not give that option to people? Just wondering. Later, Marc -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:23:27 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in the USA. How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp bandwidth they donate? Hell no... I don't see the need. Well, many others did. And many others agreed with the other changes you disagree with. These decisions have been made. The time for discussion is _over_, unless you've got something more substantial than the pot-shots you've been taking so far. Who? I've been reading this list long before the the notice of incorpoation came through. I never saw any discussion about it. Excuse me if I missed it, but I never remember seeing a single post asking if it was OK if a few guys in the group became 'Debian' If you feel these changes make it impossible for you to use Debian, we're sorry, but it looks like the time has come for you to move to another distribution or start your own or whatever. I just spoke with someone today about this, and he said it looks like this crap might just do that. If these changes do not make it impossible for you to use Debian, then please come up with something substantial enough that it might actually make people reconsider (I'll give you a clue, I don't see the need ain't likely to work---obviously the others did) or *drop it*. I've said it ten times. Politics are starting to come into play over the technical aspects of the distribution. If it is furthered it will either destroy the project or break it up. There was no good reason for a corp to be formed. I kept quite. There was no good reason to put out an 'Official' cd (which hurt a lot of our CD-R guys), and I kept quite. Now for the most pethtic reason, the entire version control system (and quality of product, both perceived and actual) is at stake. Now I'm ventting my shit with full force. I see where this is leading. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:11:16 -0400, Marc W. Brooks wrote: Okay, I'm not sure where we disagree then. You admit that In most cases it won't even be feasible, but this also means that in some cases, it would be feasible. Could be...could. Why not give that option to people? Just wondering. Because of the 'baggage' involved with having the corp IMHO is not worth it. How much would it let us benift? The love of the product is why people donated. For those that actually pay taxes, I doubt the write off would be a deciding factor. Regardless of my feelings about the corp, the main issue to me has always been the product. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: Dave I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive Dave cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your Dave books public Bruce? Personally, I think a less confrontational tone would be more appropriate. You think that the domain registration is free? Do you think that the project can depend on all the machines on our ftp sites to be donated? That the Linux organizations all have no fee? If I were to take as confrontaional a view as you have, I might point out that as far I can see, you have made no contribution to the project beyond griping, (and *possibly* a _voluntary_ contribution); IMHO, the least you can do is be polite. However, I shall not descend into those depths. Do you have any basis for the implication that Bruce is doing things underhandedly with the money? Dave The purpose behind the official incorporation for Debian is Dave still beyand me, and the more I think about it I don't like it. I am sorry that you do not like it. However, the project can't be all things to all people. My native friends tell me that the appropriate reaction it ``tough''. Dave The project (like linux) has always been for freeholders all Dave over the world. Freeholders? Volunteers, mainly, I would have said. Not freeloaders. (cheap shot, I know). Dave Why the US government suddenly has to get involded, I have no Dave idea. The government is invlved minimally, I think. A private company can accept money and pay bills (I think it is very miserly for people to want everything for FREE, but expect the volunteers to pay for the project). It may also apply for a tax exepmt status (which means that the project means to be non-profitable) Dave Why does Debian need to be an artificial US government privedged Dave entiy? Get real. Dave It's our OS. We collectivly own it. Why do we suddenly need Dave permission from someone to exists I'm sure some of the other Dave anarchists here are also wondering about these things You are perfectly free to start your own distribution of Linux, you and all other ``anarchists'' (anyone else thinking of Natasha and Boris?). Nobody is taking your precious little OS from you. Manoj otherwise known as Bullwinkle -- The desire of power in excess caused angels to fall; the desire of knowledge in excess caused man to fall; but in charity is no excess, neither can man or angels come into danger by it. -- Bacon Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: Sidetracking the issue insults my intellegence. Fuck you. Your own comment insults your intellegence (what little I have seen) far more than Behan. Try a comment with more thought involved, Dwarf P.S. I've never understood why that particular phrase is used as an insult. If the right person speaks the phrase, I am not at all insulted. -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave The new version naming scheme and control is based on politics Dave and not technical reasons. But it is not technically inferior to the previous naming convention in any way. Dave If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings Dave CD-Rom, they could get back to simply working towards the Dave orginazation of a quality product. Thats their purpose as far Dave as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers can keep their Dave stock up to date. Then you are naive. The best product (Betamax,apple) can die out if absolutely no effort is made to promote it. And it is not as if we decided on a technically inferior naming scheme. I don't see why you are making such a mountain out of this. In any case, your perception of the Projects purpose may not be relevant to the people who comprise the project. We think we can a quality free product without ignoring our commercial friends. (Oh, yes, we do have commercially inclined friends, though this may shock you). manoj -- You can't tell which way the train is going by looking at the tracks. unknown Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:20:36 -0400 (EDT), Will Lowe wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote:
If the orginization were not invloded in promotions, and makings CD-Rom,
they
could get back to simply working towards the orginazation of a quality
product.
Thats their purpose as far as I'm concerned, not worring about if CD makers
can
keep their stock up to date.
I think that _anything_ that helps make Debian more mainstream and
available to new users is worthwhile as long as it doesn't compromise the
inherent stability and usefullness of the Debian distribution.
Here here. But it should not be anyones jobs. You can't bring that
commerization
aspet in with the people that make decsions on the future of a free product.
It
sways thems
I say this not from a We are Hackers of Debian; Prepare to be
Assimilated or Let's take over the planet standpoint, but because in
order to get more commercially-available software into Debian
format/compatibility, we need to make the distribution commercially
viable. It'd be nice if eventually you could download netscape3024.deb
or get the newest release of your favorite
{game;utility;screensaver;officesuite} in Linux (esp. Debian) ala Quake or
Wordperfect Linux.
But it won't happen unless people are convinced that linux is a workable,
commercially-viable alternative to products from Gates, Inc. I think
Debian's the best shot it's got.
You should't even worry about that. What will happen, will happen because of
how
good debian is. I'm not saying hide it, just don't do things that puts the
orginaizers
in a competative state with each other.
Getting the word out is all that is needed. Making CDs available (not just
cheap!) is
scifecent and something custimarily handled by several developers in the group.
If cheapbytes wants to rep out 5 thousand CD's that's their perogative. But we
should in no way feel obligated to cater to their ability to sell those cd's.
-
http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214
http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 12:42:02 -0400, Behan Webster wrote: Dave Cinege wrote: On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: On top of that, not everyone can donate time or resourses, but they can contribute money. To who? Am I a part of Debian.org? Do I have a vote.even if I maintain 50 packages?? Do you maintain even one? About your other points: not worth to reply. If you really need your own way, append a .1 with a black marker on all version numbers on screen. Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god. Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:23:27 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote I don't see the need. Well, many others did. And many others agreed with the other changes you disagree with. These decisions have been made. The time for discussion is _over_, unless you've got something more substantial than the pot-shots you've been taking so far. Who? The Debian developers---the people who *are* Debian. And if you doubt that for a moment, consider the two questions and their answers: Q: Can the developers develop the distribution without any users? A: Sure. It's stupid, but it can certainly be done. Q: Can the users use the distribution without the developers? A: No, because without developers no distribution exists. I've been reading this list long before the the notice of incorpoation came through. I never saw any discussion about it. Excuse me if I missed it, but I never remember seeing a single post asking if it was OK if a few guys in the group became 'Debian' I'm sorry, you seem to have some rather unusual ideas about how Debian is structured. The developers are Debian. The developers are the ones who put in a majority of the work (though I'll gladly admit that there are numerous users who devote a heck of a lot of time helping others, thanks guys), and in return for that work, they get the privelege of helping make decisions regarding the technical and organizational direction of the project as a whole. (Some might suggest that this is like rewarding people for good customer service by subjecting them to electroshock therapy, but it's the best we've come up with.) So, discussions of technical and/or organizational details take place on the debian-devel list, where the developers are. We actively solicit the input of users, and try really hard to accomodate users' needs, but, in the end, the developers make the decision. If you would like to directly participate in this process, I suggest you consider expending some effort and earning the privelege. Then you will have a full-fledged voice in the process. If you feel these changes make it impossible for you to use Debian, we're sorry, but it looks like the time has come for you to move to another distribution or start your own or whatever. I just spoke with someone today about this, and he said it looks like this crap might just do that. Sorry. Tough. Happens. There was no good reason for a corp to be formed. I kept quite. There was no good reason to put out an 'Official' cd (which hurt a lot of our CD-R guys), and I kept quite. Now for the most pethtic reason, the entire version control system (and quality of product, both perceived and actual) is at stake. Now I'm ventting my shit with full force. I see where this is leading. There was a good reason for forming a corporation---removing legal liability of the developers. As one of those developers, I would have been sincerely pissed if I'd found myself a defendent in court over a matter pertaining to Debian. As for an official CD, which are you referring to, exactly? Now, Debian creates a CD image that anyone is welcome to use. That was done to try and insure that people who bought CDs from vendors not intimately connected with Debian could have a reasonable chance of getting a working set. It had to do with seeing that our name wasn't mud because of mistakes that weren't our own---I suppose you could call that political. I call it sensitivity to users needs. As far as the issue of release naming, well, I don't feel strongly about it. But I will point out that this is an all volunteer project, and as the people who badgered David Miller about a 2.0.31 kernel found out, venting your shit will full force is most likely to get the developers---the ones doing the actual work of making the distribution---to quit bothering to do work for you. So why don't you either put up or shut up? Mike. -- Don't touch that! It's the History Eraser Button -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
The discussion is funny but inappropriate, but I think this is just what Dave wanted. However: On Aug 21, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You are perfectly free to start your own distribution of Linux, you and all other ``anarchists'' Hey, you can even base your Distribution on Debian 1.3.1 revision 2! And donate your income tax-reductable to Debian. (anyone else thinking of Natasha and Boris?). Nobody is taking your precious little OS from you ^ Please Manoj, you can do better (but I don't worry :-) Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god. Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
The purpose behind the official incorporation for Debian is still beyand me, and the more I think about it I don't like it. The project (like linux) has always been for freeholders all over the world. Why the US government suddenly has to get involded, I have no idea. Why does Debian need to be an artificial US government privedged entiy? It's our OS. We collectivly own it. Why do we suddenly need permission from someone to exists I'm sure some of the other anarchists here are also wondering about these things The government has always been involved. In general though, it is state law, not federal, that controls, and (if I remember correctly) most states impose personal liability (as in they come and take away your house and car) for unorganized groups such as Debian was. The personal liability would not have stopped at Bruce either, and theoretically could have extend to those who whine about version numbers. ;-) Now for your anarchist side, when governments become overbearing they tend to nationalize -- meaning they take property away from corporations (and other private organizations or individuals) for the supposed general welfare. So, it is not difficult to see that freedom from intrusive government does not necessarily imply fewer corporations. As a matter of fact, strong and health corporations arguably contribute as much to your personal autonomy as any other single factor. Paul Serice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On 21 Aug 1997 13:23:32 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: Dave I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive Dave cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your Dave books public Bruce? Personally, I think a less confrontational tone would be more appropriate. You think that the domain registration is free? No, I know it isn't as I pay for my own. Do you think that the project can depend on all the machines on our ftp sites to be donated? Yes. It has to. That the Linux organizations all have no fee? No. We have redhat, and caldera, and other distributions that are not. If I were to take as confrontaional a view as you have, I might point out that as far I can see, you have made no contribution to the project beyond griping, (and *possibly* a _voluntary_ contribution); IMHO, the least you can do is be polite. However, I shall not descend into those depths. Do you have any basis for the implication that Bruce is doing things underhandedly with the money? I never meant to insinuate Bruce is doing something underhanded, just that ther are no real expences to speak of past what they are *additionally* creating for themselves. If you want to go ahead and put a number on FTP access you could. If that had to be bought out right, the project would collapse instantly. Enough money to buy it could not realisticly be raised. Ever. Dave The purpose behind the official incorporation for Debian is Dave still beyand me, and the more I think about it I don't like it. I am sorry that you do not like it. However, the project can't be all things to all people. My native friends tell me that the appropriate reaction it ``tough''. Jeez I guess I set my expectations too high, looking for an OS that doesn't have 15 different revs per minor number. Was the bug fix in the 1,3 R2 that was relases this week or the 1.3 R2 that was released last week? Oh well, who cares Dave Why the US government suddenly has to get involded, I have no Dave idea. The government is invlved minimally, I think. A private company can accept money and pay bills (I think it is very miserly for people to want everything for FREE, but expect the volunteers to pay for the project). It may also apply for a tax exepmt status (which means that the project means to be non-profitable) What bills? Is there a Debian hot line? 800-call-debian? Dave Why does Debian need to be an artificial US government privedged Dave entiy? Get real. That's what a corporation is; a fictitous person. Get a law book. Dave It's our OS. We collectivly own it. Why do we suddenly need Dave permission from someone to exists I'm sure some of the other Dave anarchists here are also wondering about these things You are perfectly free to start your own distribution of Linux, It's looks like maybe Bruce already has - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:05:09 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: On top of that, not everyone can donate time or resourses, but they can contribute money. To who? Am I a part of Debian.org? Do I have a vote.even if I maintain 50 packages?? Do you maintain even one? No, but I am leading a project that uses Debian as it's base and will be finalzed in 5+ packages. Somebody out there that does maintain alot of packages...Where you asked? About your other points: not worth to reply. Thank you for sparing me yours. If you really need your own way, append a .1 with a black marker on all version numbers on screen. It's not about .1 R1, or Asub1, to the 2nd power of 4. It's about something that is frozen, actully staying frozen. If the disc says 1.3.1, I should be able crccheck the whole damn thing against the master 1.3.1 dist, and have it come up clean. Right NOW you can't even do that, and according to what bruce posted it is going to get worse, for the benefit of some cd makers. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:44:11 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:23:27 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote I don't see the need. Well, many others did. And many others agreed with the other changes you disagree with. These decisions have been made. The time for discussion is _over_, unless you've got something more substantial than the pot-shots you've been taking so far. Who? The Debian developers---the people who *are* Debian. And if you doubt that for a moment, consider the two questions and their answers: Oh boy...is this going in a circle... So, discussions of technical and/or organizational details take place on the debian-devel list, where the developers are. We actively solicit the input of users, and try really hard to accomodate users' needs, but, in the end, the developers make the decision. So this new revision scheme was agreed upon on the devl list? It was suggested, discussed and decided on the devel list? That's not how it was convaded to me. There was a good reason for forming a corporation---removing legal liability of the developers. As one of those developers, I would have been sincerely pissed if I'd found myself a defendent in court over a matter pertaining to Debian. It does no such thing. Are you an officier? Employee? Even formally subconctrated? Guess you ain't covered then. As for an official CD, which are you referring to, exactly? Now, Debian creates a CD image that anyone is welcome to use. That was done to try and insure that people who bought CDs from vendors not intimately connected with Debian could have a reasonable chance of getting a working set. It had to do with seeing that our name wasn't mud because of mistakes that weren't our own---I suppose you could call that political. I call it sensitivity to users needs. These official CD's where pushed as masters to CD makers. Low and behold by the time the order of 1.3 CDs comes in 1.3.1 is out. The cd makers are pissed, and now the whole way the version control will be done in the project is to make the Official CD a more viable product for deb.org to sell to high volume repers. THAT is political. As far as the issue of release naming, well, I don't feel strongly about it. But I will point out that this is an all volunteer project, and as the people who badgered David Miller about a 2.0.31 kernel found out, venting your shit will full force is most likely to get the developers---the ones doing the actual work of making the distribution---to quit bothering to do work for you. So why don't you either put up or shut up? Rev each change and I'm happy enough to be quite. This is the only reason I started yelling, I still feel it is a good one. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:52:36 -0500, Paul Serice wrote: The purpose behind the official incorporation for Debian is still beyand me, and the more I think about it I don't like it. The project (like linux) has always been for freeholders all over the world. Why the US government suddenly has to get involded, I have no idea. Why does Debian need to be an artificial US government privedged entiy? It's our OS. We collectivly own it. Why do we suddenly need permission from someone to exists I'm sure some of the other anarchists here are also wondering about these things The government has always been involved. In general though, it is With the developers and servers in Germany? nl? state law, not federal, that controls, and (if I remember correctly) most states impose personal liability (as in they come and take away your house and car) for unorganized groups such as Debian was. They could have not followed anything past the guy that caused it. Now they can. Now for your anarchist side, when governments become overbearing they As ours has. tend to nationalize -- As ours has. meaning they take property away from corporations (and other private organizations or individuals) for the supposed general welfare. As ours does. So, it is not difficult to see that freedom from intrusive government does not necessarily imply fewer corporations. A corporation is a creatation of the state. For the most part it is an extension of government. A well behaved corp is never punished. As a matter of fact, strong and health corporations arguably contribute as much to your personal autonomy as any other single factor. I highly doubt this. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Cinege wrote: It's not about .1 R1, or Asub1, to the 2nd power of 4. It's about something that is frozen, actully staying frozen. If the disc says 1.3.1, I should be able crccheck the whole damn thing against the master 1.3.1 dist, and have it come up clean. Right NOW you can't even do that, Not true! 1.3.1 is a fixed object, available as an Official image. It hasn't changed since its release, and, to the best of my knowledge, will not ever change. and according to what bruce posted it is going to get worse, for the benefit of some cd makers. I don't see anything getting worse! Each revision will be properly noted. We aren't doing this for the benefit of CD makers. This is for the benefit of the end user (remember them?) who needs to be able to go to a local retailer and purchase the Debian distribution. If the CD manufacturer is forced to loose his shirt every time he tries to distribute this product, he is not likely to try again, and others who might have tried will be discouraged from the attempt. I we truely want Debian to be a benefit to as many people as possible, we can't continue to treat this product as our personal property only useful to some 200 developers and a few hundred users. Success is to be measured by how many people can get access to our product. As much as we may dislike having such discussions, marketing issues must be addressed if this goal is to be met. Technical excellence is not the only requirement for a marketable product. (look at M$ products if you are unconvinced) Waiting is, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Aug 21, Dave Cinege wrote Rev each change and I'm happy enough to be quite. This is the only reason I started yelling, I still feel it is a good one. Yes, well, I'm suggesting you should shut up regardless. Mike. -- Don't touch that! It's the History Eraser Button -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Gee, calm down a bit please, Dave. Where has the money gone? So far, it's mostly been into the bootstrap expenses of a non-profit. This was something like $400 for incorporation, and $2000 for the IRS 501(c)3. Once the 501(c)3 is completed, U.S. citizens who donate to Debian can write off their donation (that means if you have a 33% tax bracket you get 33 cents back on the dollar). People who travel for Debian can write off their mileage and travel expenses. Once the 501(c)3 is over, the money will go to supporting free software, sending people to trade shows to talk about Debian and Linux, etc. Tim Sailer [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the treasurer. Why a non-profit corporation? I have a house and some Pixar stock. Suppose I get sued over Debian: Before the corporation, I could have lost the house and the Pixar stock. Putting Valerie and any kids we might have on the street for Debian is more than I'd like to do. With the corporation, it's the corporation that gets sued and its assets that are at stake, not mine. This applies to all of the Debian developers, many of whom have a lot to lose. I could not in good faith leave them exposed to that liability. Note that FSF is the same kind of corporation, a non-profit with a 501(c)3. Who paid for stuff before we started collecting donations? Me. I don't have any more money for that, sorry. Why is there an Official CD? To get Debian into more users hands. It's working _very_ well so far. It did cut down on the business of a few CD-R people, but CD-R is for small distribution runs and we were trying to make some big distribution runs. Note also that we are not forcing anyone to use the Official CD. You can make any kind of CD you want as long as you comply with the software licenses. Why change the version numbering scheme? It is a small change, it makes sense for marketing reasons, it is easy to do, and there was no reason not to do it. We're not holding up releases because of it. Should our having a corporation drive people away from Debian? I don't see why. FSF and Linux International have corporations. It's not like we're trying to be microsoft or something. We are trying to operate like any large non-profit organization. Do you want to do something differently? That's fine with us. You are welcome to derive from Debian and make an FTP-only distribution, etc. Thanks Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
(anyone else thinking of Natasha and Boris?). I was thinking of Ren and Stimpy, or maybe Itchy and Scratchy :-) Lots of people were calling for us to get real rather than just be a toy distribution. A few people resent the baggage that comes with that. The solipsist craves a world with no laws, taxes, or marketing. Others eventually accept these things as the price of working with a world of people. Sure, we can have a distribution with no users, but that would be a kind of intellectual masturbation, wouldn't it? I prefer the real thing. Thanks Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, This is a silly argument. And the person conducting the other end has managed to annoy a number of people who actually contribute to the project, and hasd decended to profanity, so this is my last word on the matter. For those who care, the old scheme was to have revisions called 2.0.1 etc, the new scheme calles them revisions. old new === === 2.0.02.0 2.0.12.0 r1 2.0.22.0 r2 There are no fewer release. All releases are numbered (with revisions, not point versions). Technically, the two schemes are the same. Mr Cinege has escalated a percived, non-technical difference into a jihad. Feel free to skip the rest, it is an lost attempt to answer what Mr Cinege feels are points. manoj Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:33:41 -0400 (EDT), Tim Sailer wrote: One of the reasons is that when people make a donation, it could be tax deductable. Right now it is not. We have to get 501(c)3 status with the US IRS first. Dave Why? Of what intestest is that to the people that don't live in Dave the USA. None. Maybe we should try incorporating in multiple countries. Hmm. That's a thought. Dave How much in donations are to planning to work towards? Heck, why create an upper limit? Dave Do you think the IRS will allow companies to write off the ftp Dave bandwidth they donate? Hell no... If the company decided to donate bandwidth for goodwill reasons, who's to stop 'em? If you don't see the need, do you think there isn't one (Hah!). Many other did. do. We even voted on this. Guess what? We want to incorporate. Dave Who? I've been reading this list long before the the notice of Dave incorpoation came through. I never saw any discussion about Dave it. Excuse me if I missed it, but I never remember seeing a Dave single post asking if it was OK if a few guys in the group Dave became 'Debian' The people who contribute to Debian, the developers, decided. It is not discussed on the users group. It is discussed on the developers list, or, possibly, on the developers private list. You want to contribute to the decision process, join Debian. Contribute! (Ever read Starship troopers?) If you feel these changes make it impossible for you to use Debian, we're sorry, but it looks like the time has come for you to move to another distribution or start your own or whatever. Dave I just spoke with someone today about this, and he said it looks Dave like this crap might just do that. Best of luck. Dave I've said it ten times. Politics are starting to come into play Dave over the technical aspects of the distribution. I think you exaggerate. Dave Jeez I guess I set my expectations too high, looking for an OS Dave that doesn't have 15 different revs per minor number. Was the Dave bug fix in the 1,3 R2 that was relases this week or the 1.3 R2 Dave that was released last week? Oh well, who cares Oh, for gods sake, what is the technical difference between 1.3.1 and 1.3 r1? *gngngngn*. Technically, the two nomenclature schemes are the same. Are we slowing point releases? we are not. Are we stopping release numbering? we are not. We just call them revisions, not point versions. What difference does that make? Dave If it is furthered it will either destroy the project or break Dave it up. There was no good reason for a corp to be formed. I kept Dave quite. No reason you could see. We, the people who are Debian, beg to differ. Dave There was no good reason to put out an 'Official' cd Dave (which hurt a lot of our CD-R guys), and I kept quite. The CD-R guys (whoever they are) could use the scripts for the official CD just as anyone else. (Note I say nothing of people making money from the hours I spend hunched over my machine in wee hours of the night, toiling for the good of the world, and getting not an ioto of money for it). Dave Now for the most pethtic reason, the entire version control Dave system (and quality of product, both perceived and actual) is at Dave stake. Now I'm ventting my shit with full force. I see where Dave this is leading. Your perception of the quality of you offering is surprisingly accurate. Personally, I'm glad to see Debian become a little more organized and getting incorporated. Dave They didn't need to get incorpoated to become more Dave orginized. The United States or any one of them has no interest Dave in our international communal project. Umm. I like governments. I am no good as a hunter-gatherer. How come Debian is ``your'' communal project, when most of the people who actually contribute to Debian do not agree with you? It means that Debian can start paying it's own bills instead of people like Bruce going out of pocket to pay for the internic domain fees. Dave Then tell him
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote: Why change the version numbering scheme? It is a small change, it makes sense for marketing reasons, it is easy to do, and there was no reason not to do it. We're not holding up releases because of it. I suppose all 67 megs in bo-updates is being held there for some other reason? Look at my signature. This is very frustrating. +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
The government has always been involved. In general though, it is With the developers and servers in Germany? nl? The presence of developers and servers in Germany does not limit the ability of the American legal system to reach the developers in the U.S. So, yes, despite developers in Germany, the government is, and always has been, involved. Think of the loop-hole if all you had to do was set up an office in Germany to avoid U.S. jurisdiction over persons and things in the U.S. This is such an obvious response, I fear I'm missing your point though. state law, not federal, that controls, and (if I remember correctly) most states impose personal liability (as in they come and take away your house and car) for unorganized groups such as Debian was. They could have not followed anything past the guy that caused it. Now they can. With all due respect, I think you have it backwards. Now, the corporation protects not just those beyond the guy that caused the problem. It even protects that particular guy. Before though, in most states at least, anyone wronged by the unincorporated organization could have followed anything past the guy that caused it to all the other members. The other members only recourse would be against the guy who caused it; however, the members would still be liable directly to the injured party. That's the way it works, and that's the way it should work. A group of people cannot avoid liability by refusing to incorporate, and as soon as the group does incorporate, the law kicks in and makes certain requirements of the corporation, e.g., that it not be undercapitalized, for the benefit of third parties who deal with the entity. Paul Serice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
It sounds so good, but where is the clear admission that the 1.3.1 on ftp is not the same as the CD? It should be at least 1.3.1 r2 by now. The consumer should be able to quickly visit ftp.debian.org before he hands money to a retailer for a product. Expecting a software buyer not to do that is tantamount to calling him an idiot. On 21 Aug 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote: For those who care, the old scheme was to have revisions called 2.0.1 etc, the new scheme calles them revisions. old new === === 2.0.02.0 2.0.12.0 r1 2.0.22.0 r2 There are no fewer release. All releases are numbered (with revisions, not point versions). Technically, the two schemes are the same. Mr Cinege has escalated a percived, non-technical difference into a jihad. +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi guys, I agree with donations and the incorporation. I've seen some messages in this thread that attributes to me some sentences I did not say, like this one: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : Dave On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:28:10 -0400, Eloy A. Paris wrote: ^ : Dave I think Debian was doing just fine before it started to receive : Dave cash donations. What expenses does it have? Can you make your : Dave books public Bruce? I did not write that :-) E.- -- Eloy A. Paris Information Technology Department Rockwell Automation de Venezuela Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9430323 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
From: Paul Wade [EMAIL PROTECTED] I suppose all 67 megs in bo-updates is being held there for some other reason? I had a phone conversation with Guy Maor. He says he'll make the release next week. He says he has no problem with the version numbering scheme. He was not waiting for me. He says he understands why someone would be impatient with 67 megs sitting there, and says that bo-updates was only a temporary solution and this should not be the usual state of our release engineering. A substantial part of that 67MB is the X change for Richard Stallman. XDM prints Debian GNU/Linux rather than Debian Linux. All of X got rebuilt to keep the release numbers consistent. I have no problem accomodating Richard, but I don't need to rush this change to every last user and make them spend money to get it, do I? Thanks Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
Hi, I think while the current 1.3.1 was being created, there was an error, making 1.3.1 replace (instead of add a few packages to) 1.3. That, though regrettable, shall not be repeated. As to bug fixed in bo-updates, they have not yet been released, they are in the test phase, and as soon as the testing group has vetted them, they shall appear as 1.3 r2 (or something similar -- I am not the release master, nor am I involved in the testing/release process, so I could be in error). manoj not sure exactly what I'm explaining at the moment -- The personal computer market is about the same size as the total potato chip market. Next year it will be about half the size of the pet food market and is fast approaching the total worldwide sales of pantyhose. James Finke, Pres., Commodore Int'l Ltd. (1982) Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Show me the money Re: Donations to Debian
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote: From: Paul Wade [EMAIL PROTECTED] I suppose all 67 megs in bo-updates is being held there for some other reason? I had a phone conversation with Guy Maor. He says he'll make the release next week. He says he has no problem with the version numbering scheme. He was not waiting for me. He says he understands why someone would be impatient with 67 megs sitting there, and says that bo-updates was only a temporary solution and this should not be the usual state of our release engineering. That's good to hear. Some of us vendors actually use Debian in our business operations so we benefit along with our customers. A substantial part of that 67MB is the X change for Richard Stallman. XDM prints Debian GNU/Linux rather than Debian Linux. All of X got rebuilt to keep the release numbers consistent. I have no problem accomodating Richard, but I don't need to rush this change to every last user and make them spend money to get it, do I? As long as it doesn't print 'Microsoft' or 'Slackware', it doesn't bother me a bit. This is the type of change that I normally note on my 'busy list' of things to do before releasing the next needed upgrade. I usually upgrade packages for the bug fixes and new features. Inserting 'GNU/' in a constant is neither. +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
