Debian + Dunc-Tank.org = dissent [LWN.net]

Last week's announcement of Dunc-Tank.org set off flame wars and controversy on Debian mailing lists including a rash of general resolutions and a post from the Project Secretary on the procedure for proposing and sponsoring General resolutions. It even had Linux-Watching wondering, 'Is Debian is dying?'.

The Dunc-Tank.org is described as "fund-raising experiment" with the initial goal of raising funds to pay Debian release managers Steve Langasek and Andreas Barth to work full time on the Debian Etch release, for a period of one month each. This project is independent of the Debian Project, however the Dunc board is made up of prominent Debian Developers including current Debian Project Leader Anthony Towns and his assistant DPL Steve McIntyre.

Therein comes the controversy. If the DPL is involved, doesn't that make it a Debian Project? Can the DPL remain objective and unbiased while working on Debian and an organization. Should Debian Developers be paid to do work on Debian?

The goal is to release Etch on schedule, which is December 4, 2006. The Debian Project and the Dunc-Tank share that goal. People will argue about how that should be achieved, but there's general agreement on the goal. If independent companies share that goal and want to help out in some fashion their assistance should be appreciated. The DPL should ensure that any help accepted from independent companies does not somehow compromise Debian. If the DPL is also the CEO of the independent company that is offering its assistance, there could be a conflict of interest. In this case Anthony has started an organization that he hopes will be able to help Debian. Dunc-Tank is an experiment which may or may not be effective. If Etch is released on schedule and Dunc-Tank helps with that goal, then every one should be can be happy about achieving that goal. If it fails Dunc-Tank won't have much of a future.

Should Debian Developers, who are all volunteers, ever be paid to work on Debian? In fact many Debian Developers have found gainful employment that allows them to work on Debian as part of their job. Companies who use Debian internally or have based their products on Debian, such as HP, Canonical, Progeny, etc., employ Debian Developers and expect them to work on Debian during company time. For the most part DDs who find such employment are encouraged, applauded, and occasionally envied, but are generally not accused of having a conflict of interest. If the release managers don't have to worry about making a living while devoting their time to the Etch release it just might help Etch go out on time.

In spite of the resolution calling for the recall of Anthony Towns as DPL, it would seem that Anthony has a fair amount of support from the developers. Anthony has offered to step down if that's what people really want, but having him step down at this point won't help Etch release on time and it may ensure that the release is hopelessly delayed.

The recall proposal would require two weeks of discussion followed by another two weeks of voting. If the resolution passed another project leader election would start immediately with nine weeks of nominating, campaigning and voting. Could Etch still be released on time with that going on? Maybe, I think most DDs would rather concentrate on the release. If Dunc-Tank proves an absysmal failure then there will still be time to oust Anthony before his term as DPL is over.

to post comments

Debian + Dunc-Tank.org = dissent

Posted Sep 28, 2006 6:20 UTC (Thu) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (3 responses)

""Therein comes the controversy. If the DPL is involved, doesn't that make it a Debian Project?""

Does the DPL having sex with somebody the same as Debian having sex with them?
Hell no. Even if he cries "Oh.. Debian!" towards the end.

Debian project may want him to more strongly distance the Dunc-Tank from Debian. Ask him to put more disclaimers, make it more obvious. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. I don't see how kicking him out of Debian will be required would make Dunc-Tank more obviously not Debian. The concept in itself requires a huge jump of illogic.

I don't even see a conflict of interest. At least not something that is horrible. Does he make any money from it? If you don't like how he runs his life don't vote for him next time.

""Can the DPL remain objective and unbiased while working on Debian and an organization.""

How many of us have lives outside of work? If I go to a bar should my boss be worried about how that reflects back on the company if a client accidently sees me there and I buy him a vodka?

Again. If you don't like how he runs his life, don't vote for him next time. This is not something that warrents kicking him out of Debian.

""Should Debian Developers be paid to do work on Debian?""

I thought a number of them already were. What about people that work on Ubuntu and contribute back to Debian? What about the people that work at Progeny and are Debian maintainers? What about the dozens of people that maintain a paticular package or do Debian stuff becuase it coincides with Debian usage at their job?

They are very much getting paid to work on Debian. At least partially. They may do it on their own, but why not should they get money?

If a user paypalls a developer money as thanks for fixing a bug in package does that developer have to worried about other Debian maintainers finding out about it?

Paying Debian developers is a GOOD thing, IMO.

Do people think that Linux kernel developers shouldn't get paid?

The whole thing is just realy stupid. IMO it is people attempting to hijack Debian over stupid politics. Debian is about to pull of one of the most important successes it has ever done: GET A RELEASE OUT ON TIME for the first time ever. And people are entirely willing to blow the entire thing out of the water because they have a stick up their ass.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

Should Debian Developers be paid to do work on Debian?

Posted Sep 28, 2006 15:48 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (guest, #307) [Link] (2 responses)

Short answer: yes.
Long answer: HELL YES.
Longest answer: in an ideal world, ALL DDs should be paid to work on
Debian. Period. Even if they are doing it as a fun hobby.

> The whole thing is just realy stupid. IMO it is people attempting to
> hijack Debian over stupid politics. Debian is about to pull of one of
> the most important successes it has ever done: GET A RELEASE OUT ON TIME
> for the first time ever. And people are entirely willing to blow the
> entire thing out of the water because they have a stick up their ass.
>
> They should be ashamed of themselves.

If I was a raving paranoid lunatic, I would say that those people _want_
Debian release to be late, and Debian to lose even more of its
hard-worked-for standing. Oh wait. I _am_ a raving paranoid lunatic.
So, ...

Should Debian Developers be paid to do work on Debian?

Posted Sep 29, 2006 0:49 UTC (Fri) by mikov (guest, #33179) [Link] (1 responses)

First the recall nonsense. Then the Firefox debacle. It really seems like a conspiracy to prevent Debian from releasing on time. Well, it makes some amount of sense - releasing Debian on time will be breaking a law of nature, so it may just be the end of the universe as we know it ...

Should Debian Developers be paid to do work on Debian?

Posted Sep 29, 2006 21:08 UTC (Fri) by nlucas (subscriber, #33793) [Link]

I'm just waiting to see when they will discover some link between the people who are giving money to a company that has stocks owned by Microsoft.

Then the plot will be complete...
(Or maybe not. SCO hasn't been involved yet.)