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

Groups > linux.debian.project > #10972 > unrolled thread

Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

Contents

  Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-28 11:50 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> - 2019-09-28 12:00 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2019-09-28 12:50 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2019-09-28 15:30 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2019-09-28 16:20 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2019-09-28 21:10 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2019-09-29 11:40 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 12:10 +0200
            Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Hector Oron <zumbi@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 12:20 +0200
              Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 12:30 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 23:20 +0200
              Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 16:20 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> - 2019-09-29 17:10 +0200
                  Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2019-09-29 19:10 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2019-09-29 01:00 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> - 2019-09-28 16:00 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-28 16:20 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> - 2019-09-28 18:20 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-28 19:00 +0200
            Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> - 2019-09-28 19:20 +0200
              Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-28 19:40 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> - 2019-09-28 20:00 +0200
                  Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-28 20:10 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 02:50 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 03:20 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 11:20 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Hector Oron <zumbi@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 12:10 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 12:30 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Hector Oron <zumbi@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 12:50 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 13:20 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> - 2019-09-29 13:30 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task, request  has seen Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2019-09-29 13:30 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> - 2019-09-30 01:40 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 13:20 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 14:00 +0200
            Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 15:30 +0200
            Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Aron Xu <aron@debian.org> - 2019-09-29 16:00 +0200
              Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Brock Wittrock <brockwittrock@gmail.com> - 2019-09-29 16:30 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Brock Wittrock <brockwittrock@gmail.com> - 2019-09-29 16:40 +0200
                Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-09-29 19:20 +0200
                  Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2019-09-30 05:00 +0200
                    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2019-09-30 10:20 +0200
                    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-10-03 16:10 +0200
                  Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-09-30 12:50 +0200
                    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-10-03 16:00 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> - 2019-09-29 14:50 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Richard Z <rz@linux-m68k.org> - 2019-09-29 23:50 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-10-03 16:10 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2019-09-30 06:30 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de> - 2019-09-30 10:20 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-09-30 12:50 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2019-09-30 17:10 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-10-03 16:10 +0200
        Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> - 2019-10-03 21:10 +0200
          Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-10-04 19:00 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2019-10-01 17:00 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task cascardo@debian.org - 2019-10-01 17:30 +0200
      Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2019-10-01 19:40 +0200
    Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2019-12-01 11:30 +0100

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#11025

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:14 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

> Having said that, I'm going to unsubscribe from this list now as I realize
> that what we do in Debian Ports is still not considered useful many others,
> so I think it's not possible to find an agreement.

To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11028

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:53:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
> Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
> good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
> time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.

+1


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11048

On 9/30/19 4:53 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:14 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> 
>> Having said that, I'm going to unsubscribe from this list now as I realize
>> that what we do in Debian Ports is still not considered useful many others,
>> so I think it's not possible to find an agreement.
> 
> To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
> Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
> good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
> time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.

I think you misunderstood. This is not for paying myself or any other
person involved in Debian Ports. This is for collecting money to be
able to convince someone experienced in hacking on the gcc code so that
they can help us save the m68k backend in gcc.

For what is worth, Richard Biener from gcc upstream told me that an
experienced gcc developer would be able to perform the task within
one months. It's mainly a matter of using enough elbow grease but not
necessarily hard work, he says.

Since I can't expect a random gcc developer to sink one month of work
into working on a backend they are most likely not going to use them-
selves, I have started a campaign on BountySource so that I can pay
them for the work.

I'm not earning a single Cent from this myself.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11029

Paul Wise writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task"):
> To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
> Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
> good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
> time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.

I absolutely agree with this.

John, please let us know if you (or someone else) tries to do this
via crowdfunding.  I promise to contribute.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11047

Hi Ian!

Apologies for my late reply.

On 9/30/19 12:40 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Paul Wise writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task"):
>> To be clear, I think the work that folks are doing on the unofficial
>> Debian ports is valuable and important and that the m68k GCC task is a
>> good idea. I only dislike using Debian funds to pay people for their
>> time. I think that crowdfunding the m68k GCC task could work.
> 
> I absolutely agree with this.
> 
> John, please let us know if you (or someone else) tries to do this
> via crowdfunding.  I promise to contribute.

We have set up a campaign on BountySource, feel free to contribute whatever
amount you want:

> https://www.bountysource.com/issues/80706251-m68k-convert-the-backend-to-mode_cc-so-it-can-be-kept-in-future-releases

Thanks for your kind words and support! Much appreciated.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11012

* John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:

> But I think the list on the page archive criteria is a bit dishonest as
> well when it asks "Are machines available to buy for the general public?"
> while I don't think an IBM Z mainframe is available to buy for the general
> public.

At last for upstream, the difference is that (I assume, I have no
direct evidence) IBM uses revenue from their Z business to fund
upstream development, and they do more than the required minimum to
keep the port working.  In that sense, the existence of the Z port is
probably not a burden on upstream as a whole (more likely the
opposite—but I haven't run any numbers, and those would likely be hard
to come by).

A contribution of the cc0 switchover to GCC could help upstream if it
removes the last remaining cc0 port and thus enables some generic
infrastructure cleanup.  The latter would obviously benefit upstream
as a whole.  But it's still a one-time thing.  It does not move the
port towards a more symbiotic upstream relationship.

The downstream perspective might be quite different, but we are
talking about funding upstream work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11023

On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

> As m68k is the oldest port of both the Linux kernel and Debian after i386,
> it would be a shame to see it go as there is still very good upstream support
> in the Linux kernel with new drivers being added regularly [4], even to Linus'
> surprise.


in the first place.. wasn't m68k the first ever impelmentation of gcc? Would be 
a shame if they wanted to drop it.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11049

Hi Richard!

On 9/29/19 11:26 PM, Richard Z wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> 
>> As m68k is the oldest port of both the Linux kernel and Debian after i386,
>> it would be a shame to see it go as there is still very good upstream support
>> in the Linux kernel with new drivers being added regularly [4], even to Linus'
>> surprise.
> 
> 
> in the first place.. wasn't m68k the first ever impelmentation of gcc? Would be 
> a shame if they wanted to drop it.

Feel free to make a donation to our BountySource campaign if you would like
to help [1].

Adrian

> [1] https://www.bountysource.com/issues/80706251-m68k-convert-the-backend-to-mode_cc-so-it-can-be-kept-in-future-releases

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11026

Le Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit :
> 
> In the future, gcc upstream expects all backends to be using MODE_CC for the
> internal register representation as the old CC0 is supposed to be removed.
> 
> Since the lack of modernization would eventually mean that m68k support would
> get removed from gcc, I'm currently running a campaign to prevent that. I
> have already opened a tracker bug upstream in gcc's bugzilla [2] as well as
> linked the issue to BountySource [3].
(...)
> I thought of something around $1000 to $5000 depending on how much the project
> is willing to spend.

Hi John and everybody,

given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers for
their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a small
contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy to your goal,
with the hope that our name will help the crowdfunding effort.
Something on a scale that would allow us to answer positively to similar
requests without putting a significant burden on our finances... Maybe
$100 ?  This is the same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse
for travel costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.

Have a nice day,

Charles

-- 
Charles Plessy                              Akano, Uruma, Okinawa, Japan
Debian Med packaging team         http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tooting from work,           https://mastodon.technology/@charles_plessy
Tooting from home,                 https://framapiaf.org/@charles_plessy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11027

Hello,

On 30.09.19 06:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit :
>> In the future, gcc upstream expects all backends to be using MODE_CC for the
>> internal register representation as the old CC0 is supposed to be removed.
>>
>> Since the lack of modernization would eventually mean that m68k support would
>> get removed from gcc, I'm currently running a campaign to prevent that. I
>> have already opened a tracker bug upstream in gcc's bugzilla [2] as well as
>> linked the issue to BountySource [3].
> (...)
>> I thought of something around $1000 to $5000 depending on how much the project
>> is willing to spend.
> Hi John and everybody,
>
> given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers for
> their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a small
> contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy to your goal,
> with the hope that our name will help the crowdfunding effort.
> Something on a scale that would allow us to answer positively to similar
> requests without putting a significant burden on our finances... Maybe
> $100 ?  This is the same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse
> for travel costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.

I like the idea to find additional "enablers" of developments that
Debian would support. And such a $100 honorary bounty might have some
merits. If we collect a couple of them, then this would also help
defining the strategy of our development a bit.

Something else that Debian (or some institution next to Debian that we
invent for that purpose) could possibly come up with is a "go fund me"
for key technologies to be ported to off-mainstream platforms. Or for
key technologies that our distribution misses.

Best,
Steffen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11030

Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task"):
> given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers for
> their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a small
> contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy to your goal,
> with the hope that our name will help the crowdfunding effort.
> Something on a scale that would allow us to answer positively to similar
> requests without putting a significant burden on our finances... Maybe
> $100 ?  This is the same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse
> for travel costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.

I think this would be a good idea.  (And I speak as one of the
strongest opponents of Dunc-Tank.)

Such a small, essentially honorary, contribution wouldn't distort our
volunteer setup, and don't need the levels of serious review and
engagement that a larger amount does.  But it would act as a tangible
way to express that we would like to see something done and might
encourage others.

We could afford to make at least dozens of such honorary contributions
a year.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11032

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

    Ian> Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc
    Ian> development task"):
    >> given the reminders that Debian refrains from paying developers
    >> for their time, I wonder if it would still be possible to make a
    >> small contribution that expresses Debian's interest and sympathy
    >> to your goal, with the hope that our name will help the
    >> crowdfunding effort.  Something on a scale that would allow us to
    >> answer positively to similar requests without putting a
    >> significant burden on our finances... Maybe $100 ?  This is the
    >> same amount as what Debian is willing to reimburse for travel
    >> costs to bug-squashing parties, for instance.

    Ian> I think this would be a good idea.  (And I speak as one of the
    Ian> strongest opponents of Dunc-Tank.)


One area where we could clearly show support is by offering to purchase
hardware for someone doing the work.
We have a longstanding practice of helping Debian developers get the
hardware they need to enable their work.  (I don't think that would
extend to paying standard prices for  a s390 system; while IBM claims
mainframes are more affordable than ever before, I'm reasonably sure
that doesn't mean affordable on our scales).
It certainly would include m68k hardware.

Had I been asked for m68k hardware in this instance, I don't think I
would have even blinked before approving the request.

--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11050

On 9/30/19 4:59 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Had I been asked for m68k hardware in this instance, I don't think I
> would have even blinked before approving the request.

The only reason I am asking is because we're currently in a situation
where we need external help. We are trying to be as cost-effective
as possible and I myself have paid for a lot of things myself, that
includes hardware and hosting them.

However, in order to solve this particular problem, we need a little
more money to succeed which is why I was asking for a single-time
donation.

Either way, we have already collected 26 donations totaling 1800
US-Dollars now [1], so I'm confident that with a little more help
from the community, we'll be able to save the m68k backend in gcc.

Regards,
Adrian

> [1] https://www.bountysource.com/issues/80706251-m68k-convert-the-backend-to-mode_cc-so-it-can-be-kept-in-future-releases

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11056

]] Ian Jackson 

> Such a small, essentially honorary, contribution wouldn't distort our
> volunteer setup, and don't need the levels of serious review and
> engagement that a larger amount does.  But it would act as a tangible
> way to express that we would like to see something done and might
> encourage others.

For me, it's not about the amount at all, but rather that we don't spend
Debian money on directly paying people or use Debian money as carrots
for directing effort.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11060

Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task"):
> Ian Jackson:
> > Such a small, essentially honorary, contribution wouldn't distort our
> > volunteer setup, and don't need the levels of serious review and
> > engagement that a larger amount does.  But it would act as a tangible
> > way to express that we would like to see something done and might
> > encourage others.
> 
> For me, it's not about the amount at all, but rather that we don't spend
> Debian money on directly paying people or use Debian money as carrots
> for directing effort.

Yes, I understand that.  I think a small amount like $100 or so
doesn't raise the same problems - it's too small to be a significant
carrot, and it seems more of a token/gesture than actually "paying
people".

But I guess from your mail that you see it differently.

Regards,
Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11033

Hi

On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> So, would -project be willing to support our cause through Debian funds?

Besides other good reasons to say "no" to this question I'm wondering
whether donators of our money would consider supporting gcc on m68k is a
good use of their money.

Kind regards

     Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11034

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:49:52PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > So, would -project be willing to support our cause through Debian funds?
> 
> Besides other good reasons to say "no" to this question I'm wondering
> whether donators of our money would consider supporting gcc on m68k is a
> good use of their money.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
>      Andreas.
> 
> -- 
> http://fam-tille.de
> 

I don't like that line of thought, because it leads to a situation where
donators have too much power over Debian. It has happened before, where
actions that were totally in line with a given institution led to one of
the donators to pull their money off of a different project.

Debian Members should be deciding what Debian does as longs as it's in
line with its Social Contract. And let's put it this way: once you
donate money, it's not yours anymore.

Of course, we should earn donators' trust that the donated money is put
to good use, but good use here should be anything that promotes our
Social Contract.

I know reality is not that simple, but if we are saying ourselves that
it's "their" money and that their say is more important than ours,
that's a message to the contrary of what I believe in.

Cascardo.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11035

>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> writes:

    Andreas> Hi
    Andreas> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 11:44:26AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
    >> So, would -project be willing to support our cause through Debian
    >> funds?

    Andreas> Besides other good reasons to say "no" to this question I'm
    Andreas> wondering whether donators of our money would consider
    Andreas> supporting gcc on m68k is a good use of their money.

Echoing to some extent one of the other responses.  I think that we
should be prepared to justify how our work meets the needs of our users
and is good for free software.

How we approach donors probably differs based on their size.

I actually think that our large donors are able to understand that one of the
reasons they give money to Debian is to do things they themselves
wouldn't do.
So, yeah, I do think some of the larger donors expect us to spend money
on projects that don't get a lot of commercial attention.  Currently I
don't think our donors (at least those who follow us) expect us to
directly fund development, but I think we could explore changing that.

I think we need to be open with our smaller donors and work with them to
make sure they are OK with what we are doing.  For example I think we
would need to be very careful to work with our small donors and bring
them through the transition if we were going to directly fund projects.

--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11153

Hi!

On 9/28/19 11:44 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I'm posting here on behalf the Debian Ports team as we're seeking support
> to finance an important development task in gcc. In particular, I'm talking
> about the one-time job to modernize the m68k backend by porting it from "CC0"
> to "MODE_CC" as described in [1].
> (...) 

Just as a heads-up: The campaign has been successful. We have collected over
$6000 in funds and an experienced GCC developer picked up the task and converted
the m68k backend to MODE_CC [1].

I have created an identical campaign for the AVR backend now [2] as this backend is
also still using the cc0 representation and some people asked me whether I could
create one campaign for AVR as well.

Thanks,
Adrian

PS: I'm not subscribed to the list, so please keep me CC'ed.

> [1] https://www.bountysource.com/issues/80706251-m68k-convert-the-backend-to-mode_cc-so-it-can-be-kept-in-future-releases
> [2] https://www.bountysource.com/issues/84630749-avr-convert-the-backend-to-mode_cc-so-it-can-be-kept-in-future-releases

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web