Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc
Ian> development task"):
>> given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers
>> for their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a
>> small contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy
>> to your goal, with the hope that our name will help the
>> crowdfunding effort. Something on a scale that would allow us to
>> answer positively to similar requests without putting a
>> significant burden on our finances... Maybe $100 ? This is the
>> same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse for travel
>> costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.
Ian> I think this would be a good idea. (And I speak as one of the
Ian> strongest opponents of Dunc-Tank.)
One area where we could clearly show support is by offering to purchase
hardware for someone doing the work.
We have a longstanding practice of helping Debian developers get the
hardware they need to enable their work. (I don't think that would
extend to paying standard prices for a s390 system; while IBM claims
mainframes are more affordable than ever before, I'm reasonably sure
that doesn't mean affordable on our scales).
It certainly would include m68k hardware.
Had I been asked for m68k hardware in this instance, I don't think I
would have even blinked before approving the request.
--Sam
Re: Standing behind GNOME Foundation against Rothschild Patent Imaging LLC?
Thanks Chris and all for the support that's been shown in this thread, it really does mean a lot while we're going through this complex period. On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 12:25:53AM +0100, Andy Simpkins wrote: > Having read the 'claim' being made, I for one, can not see there being > a case to answer, however my experience does not cover the American > patant/legal systems. To me this looks like a classic case of patent > tolling. Any and all instaces of which SHOULD be taken into court to > be struck down and the patent invalidated. On no account should these > trolls be allowed to walk away without a legal rulling against them. > At the moment, I'm not going to publicly state our strategy or position on the patent in question, as anything I do say wouldn't be legally privileged. However, I think I can say that my concern isn't just about GNOME and this case, but how free software projects are affected by this sort of patent activity more widely. On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 12:25:53AM +0100, Andy Simpkins wrote: > Where can I contribute to the war chest in order to help fund fighting this? On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 09:03:37PM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > Aye aye! We should distribute a fundraising site more widely among Debian > for anyone in our community who is willing to donate to the collective > defense of our tools. At the point when we require significant funds to fight this, I'll address it. At the moment, we're very much in the preliminary stages of this legal case. More generally, I'm talking to other folk around how to make sure that GNOME and free software isn't attacked in future. Apologies for not being able to provide more clarity at this stage, I'm sure you'll understand why! Neil -- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task
Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development
task"):
> given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers for
> their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a small
> contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy to your goal,
> with the hope that our name will help the crowdfunding effort.
> Something on a scale that would allow us to answer positively to similar
> requests without putting a significant burden on our finances... Maybe
> $100 ? This is the same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse
> for travel costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.
I think this would be a good idea. (And I speak as one of the
strongest opponents of Dunc-Tank.)
Such a small, essentially honorary, contribution wouldn't distort our
volunteer setup, and don't need the levels of serious review and
engagement that a larger amount does. But it would act as a tangible
way to express that we would like to see something done and might
encourage others.
We could afford to make at least dozens of such honorary contributions
a year.
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task
Paul Wise writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task"):
> To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
> Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
> good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
> time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.
I absolutely agree with this.
John, please let us know if you (or someone else) tries to do this
via crowdfunding. I promise to contribute.
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task
Hello, On 30.09.19 06:20, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit : In the future, gcc upstream expects all backends to be using MODE_CC for the internal register representation as the old CC0 is supposed to be removed. Since the lack of modernization would eventually mean that m68k support would get removed from gcc, I'm currently running a campaign to prevent that. I have already opened a tracker bug upstream in gcc's bugzilla [2] as well as linked the issue to BountySource [3]. (...) I thought of something around $1000 to $5000 depending on how much the project is willing to spend. Hi John and everybody, given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers for their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a small contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy to your goal, with the hope that our name will help the crowdfunding effort. Something on a scale that would allow us to answer positively to similar requests without putting a significant burden on our finances... Maybe $100 ? This is the same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse for travel costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance. I like the idea to find additional "enablers" of developments that Debian would support. And such a $100 honorary bounty might have some merits. If we collect a couple of them, then this would also help defining the strategy of our development a bit. Something else that Debian (or some institution next to Debian that we invent for that purpose) could possibly come up with is a "go fund me" for key technologies to be ported to off-mainstream platforms. Or for key technologies that our distribution misses. Best, Steffen
Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:53:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial > Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a > good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their > time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work. +1 -- cheers, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
