| 1 |
On 01/06/2017 02:43 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2017, 16:02:57 CET schrieb Matthew Thode: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> I think that this brings us more in line with the legal realities of |
| 5 |
>> running a distro like this. We may want to be separate but don't think |
| 6 |
>> that's actually the case. So we should stop pretending we are separate. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Well, that would probably merit looking around how other distros are working. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Without doing any detailed research, I'd say |
| 11 |
> * OpenSuSE, Fedora: "community branch" of a commercial enterprise |
| 12 |
> * Debian, Arch: via umbrella company (SPI) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> So none of these uses the suggested model. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
I hadn't thought of that. Looking past the obvious shortcomings of |
| 17 |
trusting a commercial entity to foster the community, are there any |
| 18 |
corporations that have the know-how and resources to throw at Gentoo? |
| 19 |
Who could be a worthy sponsor? Without a suitable candidate, it's hard |
| 20 |
for us to seriously consider sponsorship. And of course, that decision |
| 21 |
would be made on a case-by-case basis. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
To clarify, I'm against a commercial sponsor but am interested in |
| 24 |
learning who, if anyone, could be considered good enough to be our steward. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
| 28 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
| 29 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |
Archives