| 1 |
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 04:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Saturday 24 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being |
| 5 |
> > > dependent upon a single sponsor or corporation. In the interests of |
| 6 |
> > > keeping Gentoo run by the developers rather than any outside party, how |
| 7 |
> > > about the following addition to the Social Contract? |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > <heading>We will be run by the Development Community</> |
| 10 |
> > > Gentoo will be run by the development community. We will never allow |
| 11 |
> > > ourselves to be reliant upon a single sponsor or corporation. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > i dont see why this is required ? ignoring the fact that the wording is |
| 14 |
> > way too vague to do anything but cause confusion and people to spout long |
| 15 |
> > winded rants, seems like useless nitpicking about an issue that doesnt |
| 16 |
> > exist |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Supposedly >80% of our stuff is hosted in one building, where would we |
| 19 |
> find ourselves were this building to building to burn to the ground? Get |
| 20 |
> flooded? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
and how does writing a vague rule into our Social Contract propose to help the |
| 23 |
situation ? just because we have a rule that says our infrastructure needs |
| 24 |
to be spread out among sponsors doesnt mean sponsors are going to materialize |
| 25 |
out of nowhere to make this happen |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
our machines live where people have been so kind as to offer |
| 28 |
space/electricity/bandwidth/etc... |
| 29 |
-mike |
Archives