Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #14320

Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup)

Show all headers | View raw

I find the argument that is being made a bit problematic from a number
of angles.

First of all, the Social Contract clause doesn't say what they claim it
says. Clause 4 says Debian will be guided by user needs and place user
interests first. That's a directive about Debian's priorities when
making decisions, it is not a rule that any feature serving a third
party's interests is forbidden.

"Without user consent" is doing a lot of work here. A one-time, or even
seasonable notification that can be dismissed isn't really an imposition
on autonomy in any meaningful sense. You can dismiss it, disable it, or
uninstall. Equating this with a consent violation is a bit of a
stretch. Real autonomy violations involve things users can't control or
weren't told about. A visible, dismissible notice is the opposite of
that.

SMPlayer's nag was a recurring, harder-to-dismiss prompt that the
maintainer decided to patch out (if I recall correctly). That was a
maintainer decision, not a TC ruling establishing a principle. Citing it
as precedent for TC intervention conflates "a maintainer once patched
something out" with "the project has ruled fundraising notifications
violate the Social Contract."

This looks like a disagreement with a maintainer's judgment call being
escalated into a constitutional question, that doesn't seem to be what
the TC is for.

On 2026-05-12 04:24:46, Nilesh Patra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [ CCing a few relevant folks for my question ]
>
> Reading this bug report made me realize, it is kind of similar for riseup-vpn package.
> That displays a MOTD with a "please donate if you can" banner everytime one runs the app.
>
> I've never got bug reports for it yet. Is that an actual problem? I'd feel really bad
> to remove it, and personally would not want to do it.
>
> I'm looking for advice here.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 12/05/26 2:35 am, anonreporter.debian.2026@nym.hush.com wrote:
>> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
>> Package: tech-ctte
>> Severity: serious
>> Followup-For: Bug #1135385
>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-project@lists.debian.org,
>> debian-ctte@lists.debian.org
>> 
>> I request the Debian Technical Committee intervene regarding Bug
>> #1135385, concerning the default-enabled donation notification in
>> gnome-control-center, currently dismissed as a duplicate of Bug
>> #1120511.
>> 
>> The maintainer, Jeremy Bícha, has declined to address the core issue,
>> that a default-enabled fundraising notification violates Debian Social
>> Contract Clause 4: "We will be guided by the needs of our users and
>> free software community. We will place their interests first." 
>> 
>> This feature imposes an external agenda (GNOME Foundation fundraising)
>> without user consent, undermining user autonomy and Debian’s ethical
>> foundation. It is not a minor usability concern, but a policy and
>> philosophical violation, analogous to Bug #964359 (SMPlayer donation
>> nag), which was patched out due to reputational risk.
>> 
>> The maintainer’s responses (closing as duplicate, telling users to
>> run commands to disable the notification, etc), fails to engage with
>> the ethical and policy dimensions. This constitutes a willful
>> disregard of Debian’s stewardship principles. The issue leaves no
>> remaining ambiguity and is a direct conflict between upstream agendas
>> and Debian’s values.
>> 
>> Per Debian Constitution §6.1.4, I ask the TC to:
>>     Overrule the maintainer’s decision to dismiss Bug #1135385 and
>> to discontinue ignoring Bug #1120511.
>>     Require that the donation notification be either:
>>         Patched out of the Debian package, or
>>         Disabled by default with a clear, informed opt-in mechanism.
>>     Clarify that maintainers must consider Debian Social Contract
>> violations as actionable, especially when upstream decisions conflict
>> with user interests.
>>     Consider whether the maintainer’s continued refusal to address a
>> documented policy violation constitutes an unambiguous failure of
>> stewardship.
>> 
>> References:
>>     Bug #1135385: https://bugs.debian.org/1135385
>>     Bug #1120511: https://bugs.debian.org/1120511
>>     Bug #964359 (SMPlayer): https://bugs.debian.org/964359
>
-- 
micah

Back to linux.debian.project | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup) anonreporter.debian.2026@nym.hush.com - 2026-05-11 23:10 +0200
  riseup-vpn (was: Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup)) Nilesh Patra <nilesh@debian.org> - 2026-05-12 01:40 +0200
  Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup) Nilesh Patra <nilesh@debian.org> - 2026-05-12 01:40 +0200
    Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup) micah anderson <micah@riseup.net> - 2026-05-12 03:50 +0200
    Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup) Ansgar 🙀 <ansgar@debian.org> - 2026-05-12 07:40 +0200
    Re: Bug#1136336: tech-ctte: Request for intervention on Bug #1135385 (gnome-control-center donation popup) Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> - 2026-05-12 11:10 +0200

csiph-web