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

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 B¡cha, 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


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

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

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 B¡cha, 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

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

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


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 o

ne runs the app.

I've never got bug reports for it yet. Is that an actual problem? I'd fee

l 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 B¡cha, has declined to address the core issu

e,

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 eth

ical

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 a

nd

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 addre

ss 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

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

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

Hi,

On Tue, 2026-05-12 at 04:24 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote:

I've never got bug reports for it yet. Is that an actual problem?

Well, just let the ctte decide? They now have an open bug by an
anonymous reporter with no prior engagement with Debian after all... We
can at least tell that not every anonymous user is happy with it nor do
all think the "or your money back" promise is sufficient.

I would guess that the result might also cover your question as well.

Ansgar

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

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

Some general advice on this would be nice, although I think it is
challenging to argue this is a clear violation of the DSC. Hard retoric
on a topic like this is great nerd bait.
One could argue that end users will benefit if the GNOME Foundation is adequately funded, and if more people are made aware of that.
Is the main concern that this is about asking for monetary donation?
Or is the main concern that it shows a "nag" screen reminding the user
about some philosophical or project-specific matter, which may or may
not be about a donation?
Or is only the combination of those two a problem?
This seems more complex than it looks on the surface.
Maybe we could develop a position statement with recommendations for
package maintainers how to go about reasoning about this topic? I don't
see how any hard policy or ruling on this could even be phrased. We
could give general recommendations and suggestions, but leave things up
to each maintainer. I've seen a couple of packages (cannot recall which
now, riseup-vpn may have been one) with similar issues, but I never
thought a lot about it even though my initial reaction was dislike.
To take a more extreme example, let's say systemd wouldn't start before
you finished watching a 1 minute video feed saying that you should buy a Microsoft 365 subscription. Patching that "feature" out may be
permitted by the license. Should Debian do that? Do we have any policy
that REQUIRES us to do that? What would we do if Microsoft said they
would no longer sign the UEFI shim loader if we patch out the
commercial?
/Simon
Nilesh Patra <nilesh@debian.org> writes:

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 B¡cha, 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

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)