On 31 December 2014 18:10:00 GMT+00:00, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpope...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mi, 31 dec 14, 09:45:53, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> >> I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I >> want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients >> are changing distributions. Period. > >I think the point some are trying to make is that Debian's direction >can >be influenced[1], but this requires involvement. It might also be >cheaper in the long term than distro-hopping every time the >distribution >in use takes an unwanted turn. > >Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux >because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. > >[1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the >desired >changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. > >Kind regards, >Andrei >-- >http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser >Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: >http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic >http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
This is very interesting, I've always viewed Linux as 'the peoples' choice for an OS but watching these responses has made me think/realise that it's not really. Its development is driven by the biggest financial contributors - which will always be the corps. Due to it's open nature it is perhaps more susceptible to abuse/conflict in this area too. I guess I've been a little naive to that till this whole sysd thing. -- Simon
