Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Leo Lipelis]

On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 01:59:07PM -0000, David Herbert wrote:

> Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to
> know more about who gentoo is.  You're a .org but are you actually a
> charity?  What is your relationship to gentoo.com?  What is your
> relationship with IBM?  I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to
> debian's social contract, because at present any ethics (which to me
> is the whole point of linux) are only implied.

> Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?)
> for allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences,
> or any licence - so the end user can decide.

> Regards,
> David Herbert.

You know, at first I thought you had a valid concern and I admired your
ethical stance.  But after seeing this:

---
From: "David Herbert" <dsherbert@mail.com>                                      
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>                                                     
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200                              
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy                                            
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 13:59:07 -0000
---

I just think you're a phoney.  Sorry.  I mean, at least you could boot
into GNU/Linux for 1 minute to send this silly email?  Is that so
difficult?

--Leo Lipelis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[linux-dev]

mail programs aside, i have similar questions to
Mr. Herbert.  could a gentoo developer, or even the founder(s)
respond to his questions?  there are a bunch of gentoo(-related?)
sites at gentoo.com and i'm also curious as to the relation(s)
between them and gentoo.org.  i don't think a "social contract"
is absolutely necessary though the my concerns are still there.
i suppose that since the entire project is GPL'ed (if i'm not 
mistaken), it seems to embrace the concerns of free software,
but will it remain that way?

If i had to compare this to the Debian social contract, i suppose
these concerns would address #1,4,5 (of the Debian social contract).
Somewhere in one of Daniel Robbins articles for IBM DeveloperWorks, 
he mentions/rants about the third sentence of #2 "We will feed back 
bug-fixes, improvements, user requests, etc. to the "upstream" 
authors of software included in our system." (from the Debian social
contract).  #3 seems to be covered by the bugzilla "bugs" section.

the relationship between gnu-style free software and gentoo is
(as Mr. Herbert mentions) suggested yet vague, though i'd still like to hear
a more definite/authoritative? statement from gentoo developers/founder(s).

thanks,
-r.

p.s. i still plan on trying it out anyway... ;)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[David Herbert]

phoney my arse... these ethical questions need answering BEFORE installing
the OS, otherwise how would I be any different from everyone else who uses
m$?  Gentoo could be owned by Microsoft for all I know, after all what
better way would there be for m$ to squash Linux than set up their own
distro?  Does that sound stupid?  Or would it be more stupid to just take it
on trust that Gentoo are the good guys?  Answer my concerns and I will send
a very greatful email from my, yet to be installed, gentoo.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Leo Lipelis" <aeoo@gentoo.org>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 12:58 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy


> On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 01:59:07PM -0000, David Herbert wrote:
>
> > Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to
> > know more about who gentoo is.  You're a .org but are you actually a
> > charity?  What is your relationship to gentoo.com?  What is your
> > relationship with IBM?  I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to
> > debian's social contract, because at present any ethics (which to me
> > is the whole point of linux) are only implied.
>
> > Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?)
> > for allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences,
> > or any licence - so the end user can decide.
>
> > Regards,
> > David Herbert.
>
> You know, at first I thought you had a valid concern and I admired your
> ethical stance.  But after seeing this:
>
> ---
> From: "David Herbert" <dsherbert@mail.com>
> To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy
> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 13:59:07 -0000
> ---
>
> I just think you're a phoney.  Sorry.  I mean, at least you could boot
> into GNU/Linux for 1 minute to send this silly email?  Is that so
> difficult?
>
> --Leo Lipelis
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Tod M. Neidt]

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 10:37, David Herbert wrote:
> phoney my arse... these ethical questions need answering BEFORE installing
> the OS, otherwise how would I be any different from everyone else who uses
> m$?  Gentoo could be owned by Microsoft for all I know, after all what
> better way would there be for m$ to squash Linux than set up their own
> distro?  Does that sound stupid?  Or would it be more stupid to just take it
> on trust that Gentoo are the good guys?  Answer my concerns and I will send
> a very greatful email from my, yet to be installed, gentoo.
> 

Hi!

This question has been addressed previously.  See
http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-May/004613.html

Note to Everyone:

site:lists.gentoo.org <search term>

typed in google is a wonderful way to search the mailing lists archive.

tod -google, google google

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[David Herbert]

Thanks for the link but that doesn't cover it.  It's not remotely
convincing, Red Hat could say exactly the same about their distro, Red Hat's
package management system is GPL'ed but they are still very clearly a
company, very clearly a .com and it's obvious that their motives are
different from Debian's who are very clearly a .org.  The problem with
gentoo is that it is far from clear where their motives lie.  M$'s success
was started by some stupid decisions made by IBM, which IBM have regreted
and looked for ways of getting back at them ever since. IBM have their own
vested interests in Linux which have nothing to do with morality.  For IBM
supporting the free software community is a means to an their own unpleasent
ends.  Gentoo 'appears' to have strong connections to IBM, which to me
contradicts their .org status.  These are some of many reasons why I think
that if gentoo want to be a .org they need to explain who they are, hence
the need for a social contract.

Also if M$ was replaced with another company which behaved in exactly the
same way as M$ behave now we would have achieved nothing.

Regards,
David Herbert.

> Hi!
>
> This question has been addressed previously.  See
> http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-May/004613.html
>
> Note to Everyone:
>
> site:lists.gentoo.org <search term>
>
> typed in google is a wonderful way to search the mailing lists archive.
>
> tod -google, google google
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Tod M. Neidt]

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 12:09, David Herbert wrote:

> ends.  Gentoo 'appears' to have strong connections to IBM, which to me
> contradicts their .org status.  These are some of many reasons why I think
> that if gentoo want to be a .org they need to explain who they are, hence
> the need for a social contract.
> 

I think you might be confused by the existence of the gentoo.com domain
name.  Please review this entire thread

http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-September/006795.html

There can also be found threads in the archives debating the relative
merits and requirements of various licenses.

Unless drobbins feels the need to clarify his position to you, I'm
afraid the information provided to you will have to suffice.  If this is
not sufficient, I have formed the impression (rightly or wrongly) that
you would probably be more comfortable using and contributing to Debian.

Best of Luck,

tod  

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Kenneth Vestergaard Schmidt]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 12:29:18PM -0600, Tod M. Neidt wrote:
> Unless drobbins feels the need to clarify his position to you, I'm
> afraid the information provided to you will have to suffice.  If this is
> not sufficient, I have formed the impression (rightly or wrongly) that
> you would probably be more comfortable using and contributing to Debian.

In any way, if Portage is released under the GPL, and if the ebuild-files are
GPL, then if drobbins suddenly commercializes Gentoo people can always take
the sources and make their own Tengoo distribution. This is why the GPL is
a virus, and why it's a good virus.

/Kenneth

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[David Herbert]

My issue is not about the 'relative merits and requirements of various
licenses' as such, although that does play a part.  Here's the point.
Microsoft plan is total world domination, they want the open internet
standards to be replaced by their own closed standards, etc, etc... this is
all in their long term business plan which they publish on their website
(investor relations link http://www.microsoft.com/msft/) so at least they're
honest about it.  Red Hat, SUSE and the rest are honest about their
positions as businesses, and I have no problem with any of them.

Where I have a problem is with the totally dishonest implication that
gentoo.org is making. Gentoo.org is implying that they are somehow
different, but it now quite clear that you are not.  I think that if you
were a .org in sprit rather then just a domain name, you would be proud and
happy to answer my ethical concerns, but instead you are mearly brushing
away and dismissing them, which is exactly what I'd expect of Microsoft, I
just never expected it from a Linux .org organization.  I'm also surprised
that apparently so many people are helping you, giving you there own time
and effort without questioning who you are.

The reason I got interested in gentoo.org in the first place was for the
very reason that you were a .org.  There are lots of other Linux  .com
companies springing up and very few .orgs.  I pleasantly surprised to find
another .org and wanted to support you, I am now of course sawly
dissapointed and will take your suggestion to go for debian, I think you are
right, I will be happier there.

Regards,
David Herbert

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tod M. Neidt" <tod@gentoo.org>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy


> On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 12:09, David Herbert wrote:
>
> > ends.  Gentoo 'appears' to have strong connections to IBM, which to me
> > contradicts their .org status.  These are some of many reasons why I
think
> > that if gentoo want to be a .org they need to explain who they are,
hence
> > the need for a social contract.
> >
>
> I think you might be confused by the existence of the gentoo.com domain
> name.  Please review this entire thread
>
> http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-September/006795.html
>
> There can also be found threads in the archives debating the relative
> merits and requirements of various licenses.
>
> Unless drobbins feels the need to clarify his position to you, I'm
> afraid the information provided to you will have to suffice.  If this is
> not sufficient, I have formed the impression (rightly or wrongly) that
> you would probably be more comfortable using and contributing to Debian.
>
> Best of Luck,
>
> tod
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Daniel Robbins]

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 12:19, David Herbert wrote:
> Where I have a problem is with the totally dishonest implication that
> gentoo.org is making. Gentoo.org is implying that they are somehow
> different, but it now quite clear that you are not.  I think that if you
> were a .org in sprit rather then just a domain name, you would be proud and
> happy to answer my ethical concerns, but instead you are mearly brushing
> away and dismissing them, which is exactly what I'd expect of Microsoft, I
> just never expected it from a Linux .org organization.  I'm also surprised
> that apparently so many people are helping you, giving you there own time
> and effort without questioning who you are.

Tod and aeoo (the people who have been replying to you up until now) are
new Gentoo Linux developers, and their responses do *not* represent the
official policy or friendliness of the Gentoo Linux development
community as a whole.  I think that they (well, at least Tod) were
trying to point you to information that would hopefully answer your
question.

I lead Gentoo Linux development, and you should take my response as
being official.

Here's your answer.  _We abide by the Debian Social Contract_, taking
into account necessary differences in item 5 due to the nature of the
Portage system, explained below.

Item 5 states that "non-free" software is not a part of the Debian
distribution.  We include build scripts for non-free software in our
Portage tree as a convenience for users, and *do* consider those build
scripts part of Gentoo Linux.  Since they are just build scripts (and
not binaries themselves), doing this is perfectly legal and does not
endanger the "freeness" of the rest of the distribution.  Besides this
semantic difference, we abide by all other areas of the Debian Social
Contract, *including* the statement that Gentoo Linux will never be
dependent on non-free software in order to function.  Well, with the
possible exception of your PC BIOS :)

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Tod M. Neidt]

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 13:40, Daniel Robbins wrote:

> Tod and aeoo (the people who have been replying to you up until now) are
> new Gentoo Linux developers, and their responses do *not* represent the
> official policy or friendliness of the Gentoo Linux development
> community as a whole.  I think that they (well, at least Tod) were
> trying to point you to information that would hopefully answer your
> question.
> 
Hi!

Daniel is correct, I am new and don't know what I'm talking about.

I regret any confusion, ill will, or animosity my previous posts
created.  Gentoo Linux *is* an exceedingly open and friendly community
in spirit and, as I myself have found, in practice.

My apologies to David Herbert, Daniel Robbins and the rest of Gentoo
Linux's community of users and developers.

Sincerely,

Tod Michael Neidt

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Chuck Haines]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ok, I don't think that this is the place to discuss this.  Gentoo is an
awesome distro and if you can't take that then go somewhere else.  Quite
frankly, I am tired of seeing your posts litter this list.  You should try
gentoo before making assumptions.  My hat goes off to the developers for
the qaulity work they have done.

- -Chuck

On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, David Herbert wrote:

> Thanks for the link but that doesn't cover it.  It's not remotely
> convincing, Red Hat could say exactly the same about their distro, Red Hat's
> package management system is GPL'ed but they are still very clearly a
> company, very clearly a .com and it's obvious that their motives are
> different from Debian's who are very clearly a .org.  The problem with
> gentoo is that it is far from clear where their motives lie.  M$'s success
> was started by some stupid decisions made by IBM, which IBM have regreted
> and looked for ways of getting back at them ever since. IBM have their own
> vested interests in Linux which have nothing to do with morality.  For IBM
> supporting the free software community is a means to an their own unpleasent
> ends.  Gentoo 'appears' to have strong connections to IBM, which to me
> contradicts their .org status.  These are some of many reasons why I think
> that if gentoo want to be a .org they need to explain who they are, hence
> the need for a social contract.
>
> Also if M$ was replaced with another company which behaved in exactly the
> same way as M$ behave now we would have achieved nothing.
>
> Regards,
> David Herbert.
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > This question has been addressed previously.  See
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/2001-May/004613.html
> >
> > Note to Everyone:
> >
> > site:lists.gentoo.org <search term>
> >
> > typed in google is a wonderful way to search the mailing lists archive.
> >
> > tod -google, google google
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

- ----------------------
| Chuck Haines       |
| WPI Class of 2005  |
| chaines@wpi.edu    |
| AOL IM: CyberGrex  |
- ----------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (OSF1)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8XuEJ7HPTHjUkyKwRAmsXAJ0R6H+dp/mGT9lZvXs/R0uoq4jfbgCePe6F
BfEd7Pihb9Uz1MdqpssUmSc=
=jjDl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Daniel Robbins]

On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 06:59, David Herbert wrote:
> Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to know more about who gentoo is.  

> You're a .org but are you actually a charity?  

No, we're not a charity but we accept donations to help offset
development/hosting/hardware costs. For the most part, these expenses
have been coming out of my and our volunteer network admin's pockets. 
The "donate" button is there so that those who enjoy Gentoo Linux can
freely offer their support for our project.

> What is your relationship to gentoo.com?

Our domain names both have "gentoo" in them.

> What is your relationship with IBM?

None, other than I do contract work for them (indirectly) to pay my
bills.  

> I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to debian's social contract, because at present any ethics (which to me is the whole point of linux) are only implied.

I don't think that a Gentoo Linux social contract would necessarily be a
bad thing.  However, from past experience I've found that these kinds of
written "ethical guidelines" are often not followed or respected.  I
also don't see anything in the Debian Social Contract that is anything
special.  "We won't hide problems"?  Isn't this stuff kind of obvious
for a free software project?  But there are some good things in there. 
I don't really see this as a "social contract" (since it's not as if
it's enforceable), but more like design/policy guidelines.

> Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?) for allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences, or any licence - so the end user can decide.

Yes, we plan to add that feature at some point.

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[David Herbert]

Hi Daniel,

Thanks, for writing but again you're avoiding the question, for example a
quote from your website:

"Gentoo Linux is a versatile and fast, completely free x86-based Linux
distribution"

will it stay completely free, if so and considering you are not a charity
how do you plan to make money?  I assume you do plan to make money out of
the distro?

"For the most part, these expenses have been coming out of my and our
volunteer network admin's pockets"  - This sounds like you are generous,
good spirited, etc.  But actually this is true for any startup company,
would I have volenteered or donated money to the startup company called
microsoft, I don't think so.  So again if you want to be treated differently
to any other startup company, I think you need to explain how you are
different to the other startup companies.

Does Gentoo Technologies own any domains other than gentoo.org?

And a final point to Chuck Haines, I'm not critising the quality of the
distro, quite the opposite, the portage system is one of the cleaverest,
best designed, therotically superior pieces of software I've seen.  I quite
sure the rest of the distro is of equal quaility.

Regards,
David Herbert


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Robbins" <drobbins@gentoo.org>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy


> On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 06:59, David Herbert wrote:
> > Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to
know more about who gentoo is.
>
> > You're a .org but are you actually a charity?
>
> No, we're not a charity but we accept donations to help offset
> development/hosting/hardware costs. For the most part, these expenses
> have been coming out of my and our volunteer network admin's pockets.
> The "donate" button is there so that those who enjoy Gentoo Linux can
> freely offer their support for our project.
>
> > What is your relationship to gentoo.com?
>
> Our domain names both have "gentoo" in them.
>
> > What is your relationship with IBM?
>
> None, other than I do contract work for them (indirectly) to pay my
> bills.
>
> > I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to debian's social contract,
because at present any ethics (which to me is the whole point of linux) are
only implied.
>
> I don't think that a Gentoo Linux social contract would necessarily be a
> bad thing.  However, from past experience I've found that these kinds of
> written "ethical guidelines" are often not followed or respected.  I
> also don't see anything in the Debian Social Contract that is anything
> special.  "We won't hide problems"?  Isn't this stuff kind of obvious
> for a free software project?  But there are some good things in there.
> I don't really see this as a "social contract" (since it's not as if
> it's enforceable), but more like design/policy guidelines.
>
> > Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?) for
allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences, or any
licence - so the end user can decide.
>
> Yes, we plan to add that feature at some point.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
> Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org
> Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[mbutcher]

There are a few presuppositions floating here that should probably be 
addressed  in order to overcome what appears to be a misunderstanding of a 
few terms.

".org" - being a dot-org does not mean that a company is a "Charity," it 
means that a company is a not-for-profit company or entity. That may include 
charities, but it also includes any other company that does not charge for 
services or products.

freeness - Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSe, etc. are not "unfree" because they charge 
for the CD distributions of their products. All three of them (and many many 
other commercial Linux copies) still provide source code, and still provide 
downloads free of charge, thus meeting both the "free speech" and "free beer" 
definitions of free. 

Even _if_ Gentoo sold commercial CDs of Gentoo Linux, they could still make 
the claim that they were completely free, because it would still be possible 
to get copies of the source code for every single part of Gentoo, since it is 
all under GPL. 

GPL - Please don't take this as an affront, but it would probably help you 
understand the issues if you read through the license (GPL) and some of the 
auxilary materials at gnu.org. That might help you understand why many of us 
think that the Debian Social Contract is in some ways restating the obvious. 
Note that Gnu.org is also a not-for-profit, has been around for many years, 
and is not "another Microsoft."
http://www.gnu.org

Matt Butcher

On Monday 04 February 2002 12:42 pm, you wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thanks, for writing but again you're avoiding the question, for example a
> quote from your website:
>
> "Gentoo Linux is a versatile and fast, completely free x86-based Linux
> distribution"
>
> will it stay completely free, if so and considering you are not a charity
> how do you plan to make money?  I assume you do plan to make money out of
> the distro?
>
> "For the most part, these expenses have been coming out of my and our
> volunteer network admin's pockets"  - This sounds like you are generous,
> good spirited, etc.  But actually this is true for any startup company,
> would I have volenteered or donated money to the startup company called
> microsoft, I don't think so.  So again if you want to be treated
> differently to any other startup company, I think you need to explain how
> you are different to the other startup companies.
>
> Does Gentoo Technologies own any domains other than gentoo.org?
>
> And a final point to Chuck Haines, I'm not critising the quality of the
> distro, quite the opposite, the portage system is one of the cleaverest,
> best designed, therotically superior pieces of software I've seen.  I quite
> sure the rest of the distro is of equal quaility.
>
> Regards,
> David Herbert
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel Robbins" <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy
>
> > On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 06:59, David Herbert wrote:
> > > Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to
>
> know more about who gentoo is.
>
> > > You're a .org but are you actually a charity?
> >
> > No, we're not a charity but we accept donations to help offset
> > development/hosting/hardware costs. For the most part, these expenses
> > have been coming out of my and our volunteer network admin's pockets.
> > The "donate" button is there so that those who enjoy Gentoo Linux can
> > freely offer their support for our project.
> >
> > > What is your relationship to gentoo.com?
> >
> > Our domain names both have "gentoo" in them.
> >
> > > What is your relationship with IBM?
> >
> > None, other than I do contract work for them (indirectly) to pay my
> > bills.
> >
> > > I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to debian's social contract,
>
> because at present any ethics (which to me is the whole point of linux) are
> only implied.
>
> > I don't think that a Gentoo Linux social contract would necessarily be a
> > bad thing.  However, from past experience I've found that these kinds of
> > written "ethical guidelines" are often not followed or respected.  I
> > also don't see anything in the Debian Social Contract that is anything
> > special.  "We won't hide problems"?  Isn't this stuff kind of obvious
> > for a free software project?  But there are some good things in there.
> > I don't really see this as a "social contract" (since it's not as if
> > it's enforceable), but more like design/policy guidelines.
> >
> > > Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?) for
>
> allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences, or any
> licence - so the end user can decide.
>
> > Yes, we plan to add that feature at some point.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> > Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org
> > Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[mbutcher]

One other rhetorical question:

Wouldn't it make sense for Gentoo to buy other gentoo related names (e.g. 
gentoo.com, gentoo.net, gentoo-for-money.com) in order to prevent other 
companies from registering those names and claiming to be affiliated with 
Gentoo Technologies? Why, then, would registration of other domains be proof 
of devious motives?

On Monday 04 February 2002 12:42 pm, you wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thanks, for writing but again you're avoiding the question, for example a
> quote from your website:
>
> "Gentoo Linux is a versatile and fast, completely free x86-based Linux
> distribution"
>
> will it stay completely free, if so and considering you are not a charity
> how do you plan to make money?  I assume you do plan to make money out of
> the distro?
>
> "For the most part, these expenses have been coming out of my and our
> volunteer network admin's pockets"  - This sounds like you are generous,
> good spirited, etc.  But actually this is true for any startup company,
> would I have volenteered or donated money to the startup company called
> microsoft, I don't think so.  So again if you want to be treated
> differently to any other startup company, I think you need to explain how
> you are different to the other startup companies.
>
> Does Gentoo Technologies own any domains other than gentoo.org?
>
> And a final point to Chuck Haines, I'm not critising the quality of the
> distro, quite the opposite, the portage system is one of the cleaverest,
> best designed, therotically superior pieces of software I've seen.  I quite
> sure the rest of the distro is of equal quaility.
>
> Regards,
> David Herbert
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel Robbins" <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy
>
> > On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 06:59, David Herbert wrote:
> > > Call me paranoid but before putting effort into gentoo I would like to
>
> know more about who gentoo is.
>
> > > You're a .org but are you actually a charity?
> >
> > No, we're not a charity but we accept donations to help offset
> > development/hosting/hardware costs. For the most part, these expenses
> > have been coming out of my and our volunteer network admin's pockets.
> > The "donate" button is there so that those who enjoy Gentoo Linux can
> > freely offer their support for our project.
> >
> > > What is your relationship to gentoo.com?
> >
> > Our domain names both have "gentoo" in them.
> >
> > > What is your relationship with IBM?
> >
> > None, other than I do contract work for them (indirectly) to pay my
> > bills.
> >
> > > I suppose I'm looking for a statement akin to debian's social contract,
>
> because at present any ethics (which to me is the whole point of linux) are
> only implied.
>
> > I don't think that a Gentoo Linux social contract would necessarily be a
> > bad thing.  However, from past experience I've found that these kinds of
> > written "ethical guidelines" are often not followed or respected.  I
> > also don't see anything in the Debian Social Contract that is anything
> > special.  "We won't hide problems"?  Isn't this stuff kind of obvious
> > for a free software project?  But there are some good things in there.
> > I don't really see this as a "social contract" (since it's not as if
> > it's enforceable), but more like design/policy guidelines.
> >
> > > Also it would be nice to have a global option (in /etc/make.conf ?) for
>
> allowing only GPL'ed software, GPL + other "open source" licences, or any
> licence - so the end user can decide.
>
> > Yes, we plan to add that feature at some point.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> > Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org
> > Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ethical Policy

[Daniel Robbins]

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 12:42, David Herbert wrote:
> Thanks, for writing but again you're avoiding the question, for example a
> quote from your website:
> 
> "Gentoo Linux is a versatile and fast, completely free x86-based Linux
> distribution"
> 
> will it stay completely free, if so and considering you are not a charity
> how do you plan to make money?  I assume you do plan to make money out of
> the distro?

Actually, I already answered this question.  See item 1 of the Debian
Social Contract, "Debian will remain 100% free software."  As I stated
in my last email, the Debian Social Contract aligns with the policies of
Gentoo Linux.  I plan to add this as a FAQ item on our Web site soon.

> "For the most part, these expenses have been coming out of my and our
> volunteer network admin's pockets"  - This sounds like you are generous,
> good spirited, etc.  But actually this is true for any startup company,
> would I have volenteered or donated money to the startup company called
> microsoft, I don't think so.  So again if you want to be treated differently
> to any other startup company, I think you need to explain how you are
> different to the other startup companies.

OK, good point.  The difference is that all our work is released under
the GPL, and although we have a development "chain of command," we have
a (for the most part) open development model, open bug tracker, open
mailing lists and open irc channels.  And most importantly, any
profit-generating projects will not compromize the "freeness" of Gentoo
Linux as a whole. In fact, we are hoping to serve as the base for two
other Linux distributions -- SuxOS and Latinux.  This is of course not
costing these distributions anything.  We're happy to work with them
because we are a free software project and do not simply follow the GPL
in grudging obligation or spend countless hours figuring out ways
"around" it.

"Gentoo Technologies, Inc" is a private C corporation that I use for
handling my article/tutorial writing contracts.  It also holds the
copyrights for Gentoo Linux and owns the gentoo.org domain.  Gentoo
Technologies has a single employee -- myself.  Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
generates no income from Gentoo Linux.  If and when it does, it will
continue to abide by the ethical guidelines set forth in the Debian
Social Contract.  Of course, making money has nothing to do with with
the "freeness" (liberty) of software anyway.

Also, so far Damon and I have probably spent around $4000 total for
Gentoo Linux hardware and hosting costs.  gentoo.org is currently being
hosted on what up until recently used to be Damon's home PC.  So far,
Gentoo Technologies has probably received about $350 in advertising
revenue and around $350 in donations.  So, no one is making money here
at the moment.

But would we like to make money?  Yes, absolutely.  But such income will
not be made by compromising the "freeness" of Gentoo Linux as a whole or
by limiting the ability of others to make money from Gentoo Linux. 
Anyone is free to start a Gentoo Linux-related business and make money
using Gentoo Linux; in fact, we encourage this.

> Does Gentoo Technologies own any domains other than gentoo.org?

No.

> And a final point to Chuck Haines, I'm not critising the quality of the
> distro, quite the opposite, the portage system is one of the cleaverest,
> best designed, therotically superior pieces of software I've seen.  I quite
> sure the rest of the distro is of equal quaility.

:)

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.