On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 12:04:47PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > When I say "the circumstances were different", I mean that at the time, > it was about paying people to do release management of testing, and that > it was originally suggested by the DPL. In this case, it is about > paying people to work on the exact opposite of the release train,
right.
> and it
> has no DPL involvement.
(Chris is involved in LTS, but I get what you meant.)
> I think it would be fine if Debian were to, occasionally, sponsor people
> to work on LTS, provided that it does not become a "LTS is only paid for
> by Debian" situation. Say, we could do a matching drive or something
> along those lines (as in, "Debian will match any sponsorship up to
> XYZ").
I don't think that would be fine...
> Of course you might reasonably disagree with that opinion, but "the
> circumstances are different" is a simple statement of fact ;-)
... and that's what I meant when I said not much has changed: what was
bad about about the idea of Debian paying people I still think is bad
today. And I don't think I'm alone here.
Money is a cause of friction (at best) and as such I firmly believe it's
better we keep money/paying contributors out of Debian *itself*.
--
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
