Commentaires sur : Some words about dunc-tank http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/ Rien de tel qu'un blog pour partager ses projets les plus fous Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:36:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 Par : Puslingblog|globgnilsuP » Blog Archive » My votes http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-5991 Puslingblog|globgnilsuP » Blog Archive » My votes Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:54:39 +0000 http://www.ouaza.com/wordpress/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-5991 [...] Some people have asked me why I voted that way. Here is some pointers. [...] [...] Some people have asked me why I voted that way. Here is some pointers. [...]

]]> Par : Odile B http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-2169 Odile B Sat, 02 Dec 2006 10:40:24 +0000 http://www.ouaza.com/wordpress/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-2169 Hello, I think dunc-tank is very good, and sadly I read only 447 USD donated at the moment (from https://www.pubsoft.org/pubsoft.py/project?proj=Dunc-Tank-etch-rm) I hope the amount will increase soon. I would even say that perhaps the european people would not send money to an US foundation, but they would send to an european foundation, or association, if that was possible. My 2 cents Hello, I think dunc-tank is very good, and sadly I read only 447 USD donated at the moment (from https://www.pubsoft.org/pubsoft.py/project?proj=Dunc-Tank-etch-rm)

I hope the amount will increase soon.

I would even say that perhaps the european people would not send money to an US foundation, but they would send to an european foundation, or association, if that was possible.

My 2 cents

]]> Par : Buxy http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-758 Buxy Sat, 23 Sep 2006 15:18:10 +0000 http://www.ouaza.com/wordpress/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-758 > Really I do not think that Debian developpers should share decision about the project with “donors” For me the difference is substantial because the structure will fund only projects proposed by Debian developers and the donors won't lead Debian. They will simply have the possibility to boost the development in some specific area. And in any case, a funded project has no guaranty of integration in Debian if the project itself is not accepted by the other developers concerned. To speak with concrete examples: a donor will never be able to change the Debian policy, he won't influence the social contrat, won't change the result of any general resolution. However, I have a big list of gforge improvements than I want to do for alioth.debian.org... and here I want to give the possibility to donors to choose which project to fund. It can be win-win situation in many cases: the donor might be an alioth.debian.org user which is annoyed by the lack of a given feature and he wants to encourage us improving a specific part. Or the donor can be a company using Debian and gforge for their internal use. > I do not either think that “donors” will let other people share their decision-power of what to do with their money. Of course, Debian developers can't dictate what other people have to do with their money, but donors who are "simple supporters" will more likely fund projects which have the preference/priority of Debian developers than other projects. > Really I do not think that Debian developpers should share decision about the project with “donors”

For me the difference is substantial because the structure will fund only projects proposed by Debian developers and the donors won’t lead Debian. They will simply have the possibility to boost the development in some specific area. And in any case, a funded project has no guaranty of integration in Debian if the project itself is not accepted by the other developers concerned.

To speak with concrete examples: a donor will never be able to change the Debian policy, he won’t influence the social contrat, won’t change the result of any general resolution. However, I have a big list of gforge improvements than I want to do for alioth.debian.org… and here I want to give the possibility to donors to choose which project to fund. It can be win-win situation in many cases: the donor might be an alioth.debian.org user which is annoyed by the lack of a given feature and he wants to encourage us improving a specific part. Or the donor can be a company using Debian and gforge for their internal use.

> I do not either think that “donors” will let other people share their decision-power of what to do with their money.

Of course, Debian developers can’t dictate what other people have to do with their money, but donors who are “simple supporters” will more likely fund projects which have the preference/priority of Debian developers than other projects.

]]> Par : luna http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-757 luna Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:48:55 +0000 http://www.ouaza.com/wordpress/2006/09/22/some-words-about-dunc-tank/#comment-757 Compare « My long term project always involved that decision-making would be shared between the donors and all Debian developers. » and « My long term project always involved that decision-making of what to fund would be shared between the donors and all Debian developers. » I do not think that the difference is so big and I do not think Sam's interpretation is so bad. Really I do not think that Debian developpers should share decision about the project with "donors" (which power is relative to their money mass) I do not either think that "donors" will let other people share their decision-power of what to do with *their* money. Compare
« My long term project always involved that decision-making would be shared between the donors and all Debian developers. »
and
« My long term project always involved that decision-making of what to fund would be shared between the donors and all Debian developers. »

I do not think that the difference is so big and I do not think Sam’s interpretation is so bad.

Really I do not think that Debian developpers should share decision about the project with “donors” (which power is relative to their money mass)
I do not either think that “donors” will let other people share their decision-power of what to do with *their* money.

]]>