In this article, the topic of Ian Jackson will be addressed from different perspectives, with the aim of delving into its importance and relevance in today's society. Ian Jackson has been the subject of interest and debate in various areas of knowledge, and its influence is felt in different aspects of daily life. Throughout the article, various research and testimonies will be examined that will shed light on Ian Jackson, providing the reader with a broader and more detailed understanding of this topic. In addition, different approaches and opinions about Ian Jackson will be analyzed, in order to enrich the panorama and present a global vision of its scope and impact.
Ian Jackson is a longtime free software author and Debian developer. Jackson wrote dpkg[1][2][3] (replacing a more primitive Perl tool with the same name), SAUCE (Software Against Unsolicited Commercial Email), userv and debbugs. He used to maintain the Linux FAQ. He runs chiark.greenend.org.uk, a Linux system which is home to PuTTY among other things.
Jackson has a PhD in Computer Science[4] from Cambridge University. As of October 2021, he works for the Tor Project.[5][6] He has previously worked for Citrix[7][8] for Canonical Ltd.[9] and nCipher Corporation.[10]
Jackson became Debian Project Leader in January 1998, before Wichert Akkerman took his place in 1999.[11][2] Debian GNU/Linux 2.0 (hamm) was released during his term. During that time he was also a vice-president and then president of Software in the Public Interest in 1998 and 1999.
Jackson was a member of the Debian Technical Committee[12] until November 2014 when he resigned[13] as a result of controversies around the proposed use of systemd in Debian.[14]
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
I am resigning from the Technical Committee with immediate effect. While it is important that the views of the 30-40% of the project who agree with me should continue to be represented on the TC, I myself am clearly too controversial a figure at this point to do so. I should step aside to try to reduce the extent to which conversations about the project's governance are personalised.