Re: Freexian, security and Debian

On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 12:17:31AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>...
> Other competitors could have asked for funding for their project
> provided it adhered to the conditions described here[1] or there[2].
> 
> I really don't know what you are trying to prove here, but you are doing
> it badly, in my opinion.
>...

My understanding of your point is that even if Debian adopts a strong 
anti-AI position, then it would still be fine for you if a company would 
get half a million Euro granted by calling a project "Debian AI".

My point is that organizations usually protect their trademarks and 
reputation by maintaining control over what happens in their name.

If you start an open source project that includes "git" in its name,
the lawyers of the Software Freedom Conservancy might contact you and
explain the git trademark to you.

Several years ago a non-profit external package repository run by a DD
changed its name after an intervention by the DPL.


My larger point is that much about money in Debian and in the name of 
Debian is intransparent and therefore inefficient.

While searching for the number when replying to your previous email I 
realized that when counting both projects for Debian and projects that 
use use our distribution for an example implementation, [2] has granted 
over € 1.5 million to Debian-related projects during the past 36 months.

Why aren't we having a project-wide discussion in Debian where we need 
and want money, including talking with the people at [2] how much input
from Debian they accept or even appreciate for their decisions?

Do we want money for projects or are there positions where we might want 
to have people receive a monthly salary through their fellowship or both
or none?

Our own finances would also benefit from annual reports, having an 
annual budget, and some plan how to do more fundraising if we want
to spend more money than the expected income.


> Bests,
>...
> [2] https://www.sovereign.tech/programs/fund

cu
Adrian