On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 5:08 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Adrian Bunk writes:
>
> > My biggest high level concern is the income side, since this is the most
> > difficult part and will likely also be the most controversial one.
>
> I could well be entirely wrong, but the part that I would expect
Ximin Luo writes:
> Nobody is suggesting that it won't be a hard problem to get right, but
> progress isn't made by worrying about all the things that could possibly
> go wrong. Figuring out a blueprint for organising large-scale work
> using more directly-democratic principles would have lots
Russ Allbery:
> [..]
> I respect the desire to try social experiments and be bold, but my counter
> question is whether Debian as a project has the right training and the
> right people to conduct a proper social experiment *here*, on *this*
> particular topic. Do we have economists?
Russ Allbery:
> [..] The failure mode here is that we lose contributors
> because of hard feelings over who gets paid and who doesn't get paid and
> how much they get paid and how they get paid, and the project ends up
> weaker and more fragile. [..]
>
> For example, you say "democratic mandate,"
Ximin Luo writes:
> A lot of people are already paid full-time to work on Debian. Wouldn't
> it be better to additionally have some other people be paid full-time to
> work on Debian under a democratic mandate (our voting system) rather
> than under corporate orders? At the very least, it would
Russ Allbery:
> Adrian Bunk writes:
>
>> My biggest high level concern is the income side, since this is the most
>> difficult part and will likely also be the most controversial one.
>
> I could well be entirely wrong, but the part that I would expect to be the
> most controversial is that,
dear Russ,
once again, many thanks for expressing nicely what I couldnt express
that well. My thoughts exactly.
--
tschau,
Holger, who first wanted to send this in private to Russ and
then decided against.
Adrian Bunk writes:
> My biggest high level concern is the income side, since this is the most
> difficult part and will likely also be the most controversial one.
I could well be entirely wrong, but the part that I would expect to be the
most controversial is that, once Debian starts spending
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:57:51PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:56:16PM +, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
> > > For me this implies that Debian should aim at having at least US$500k
> > > reserves, to be prepared if there is no large donation coming for a
> > > future
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:56:16PM +, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
> > For me this implies that Debian should aim at having at least US$500k
> > reserves, to be prepared if there is no large donation coming for a
> > future refresh.
> Plus another $300k in reserves for DebConf in case those
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 01:50:25AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 09:04:24PM +, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
> >...
> > When we last crunched the numbers, maintaining a 5y refresh (to stay in
> > warranty, etc.) would require $75k-100k/yr. We've avoided that level of
> > annual
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 09:04:24PM +, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
>...
> When we last crunched the numbers, maintaining a 5y refresh (to stay in
> warranty, etc.) would require $75k-100k/yr. We've avoided that level of
> annual expenditure because we are keeping hardware longer than 5y and
> we've
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 05:29:42PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Adrian" == Adrian Bunk writes:
>
> I agree that's missing.
>
> I don't think that is the important information needed to drive the
> discussions I'm hoping someone will drive.
>
> Instead I'm more interested in seeing
> "Adrian" == Adrian Bunk writes:
I agree that's missing.
I don't think that is the important information needed to drive the
discussions I'm hoping someone will drive.
Instead I'm more interested in seeing discussions at a high level.
Talking about the issues involved in paying people to
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 07:49:25AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> [moving a discussion from -devel to -project where it belongs]
>
> > "Mo" == Mo Zhou writes:
>
> Mo> Hi,
> Mo> On 2019-05-29 08:38, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> Use the $300,000 on our bank accounts?
>
> So, there
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:15:02PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think it is probably not helpful to go into these kind of details
> now but since you raise the point I feel I must respond. Whether
> Dunc-Tank was a Debian initiative was precisely one of the seriously
> contested points.
agreed
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: paying people for Debian work (Re: Why do we take so
long to realise good ideas"):
> Moving this subthread to -project too.
>
> Holger> But there's one significant difference between LTS and dunc
> Holger> tank: dunc tank was ment as an initiative inside Debian,
17 matches
Mail list logo
