I like the idea a lot and, actually, I thought about something similar (more similar to Jarek's interpretation) more then once but I always stopped by thinking "who should be crazy enough to support this ?". Probably now times are mature enough to start something. Giovanni
On 4/20/22 16:07, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > I like the idea, not silly at all, but I think it has one caveat. > > Contrary to what you wrote about the ASF values, I think (that's my > first thought at least) that if it happens it should be an individual > initiative of some members. And IMHO there should be no formal > board/ASF affiliation IMHO because then it is - at least that's my gut > feeling - quite contrary to the values and the ASF legal status. > > As I see it - people representing the Support Inc. company (even if > they are from ASF) should not really be "ASF representatives" because > if they do, this puts some responsibilities and guarantees on both > sides (and especially on the ASF). There are certain guarantees that > come with more or less formal association with the ASF brand and I > think if the board overlooks the "Support Inc." - by definition it has > some guarantees (and I do not know for sure but that would likely not > be legal when it comes to the ASF status). But that would not (I > think) preclude that some of the founders are board members. As long > as there is a good care about conflict of interests separation, the > multiple-hat idea is quite easy to apply here. > > That would likely make Support Inc. less "attractive" - especially for > the potential customers (precisely because of the lack of those > guarantees by the ASF). But on the other hand, if this company is run > and started by people who are "well established" in the OSS community > the attractiveness of such a Support Inc. company is already high. If > anything, by the network of individual relations of those people who > start it. In a way this would be similar approach as Tidelift (some of > the people there are with the OSS background), but it could be > structured differently (with different incentivization for both > customers and contributors, focusing more on individual relationships > of people who would start it rather than on "brand/company", different > marketing and promotion ideas - so it could be better suited for the > ASF projects. And it could become part of the "ecosystem" around the > ASF (which the ASF could actually list on the page among others like > Tiidelfit without endorsement or guarantees). So it might be a YABD > (Yet Another But Different) Tidelift-like company. > > This is a model similar to many ASF projects commercial activities - > there are people, individuals with merit and experience in the project > and they decide to start or join a commercial company that puts their > stakes with the project. There are many stories like that and even if > some of the people are PMC members and committers that might work. > I see that it could work here as well. I think it is important to see > if there can be a real business model behind it. On top of doing "good > support" for the contributors, such a company would have to simply > have some business model and be a normal "business" I think. > > I am not sure if such an approach is contrary to the idea of yours > Chris, or whether this is something that you also considered or > whether "non-official-affiliation" is a "killer" in your idea (I hope > not :). And I am not 100% sure if my "non-affiliation" is that > important. I think it is, but I would love to hear what others and You > have to say there. > > J. > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 2:11 PM Christofer Dutz > <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> now that the Aprils Fool Joke has worn off a bit, I think I can post this >> here. I at first suggested this in the board list before April 1st, as I >> wanted to make sure this hasn’t been wiped off the table as a silly idea >> before. >> >> Turns out that I didn’t get a single “silly idea” response. >> >> As you all might know I have been working on finding ways to finance my work >> on open-source, but in an open-source way that others can also profit from >> what I might find out. >> >> There are some projects that managed to form or attract companies to grow >> around them. These usually don’t have problems finding funds to finance >> further development. >> However, we also have a large number of projects that are not as big, or a >> large number of people working on our projects, but don’t work for those >> companies. >> >> So, these people are generally relying on finding contracts themselves. This >> usually is problematic as many larger companies don’t do business with >> individuals. >> Also is it often tricky to get the legal documents and contracts right and >> then not even talking about how long payments usually take. >> >> Another thing is that the ASF is a non-profit organization and therefore >> it’s challenging to advertise commercial offerings around Apache projects. >> >> As an example: One of the things I found out with my crowd-funding >> experiment is that this doesn’t work. Admittedly I wasn’t expecting it to >> work. Companies just can’t donate large amounts of money without any >> assurances. But I did learn one thing: My crowd-funding experiment was in a >> way the most successful thing I did. >> >> The thing was, that I listed up things that could be on the roadmap and I >> added a price-tag to them. This is one thing an Apache project just couldn’t >> do. So even if I didn’t get a single cent in donations for my work, I was >> approached by multiple companies willing to finance individual campaigns, >> but with a normal consulting contract. >> >> Now there are also companies like Tidelift, that want to close this gap. >> However, we are still a bit unsure how to align the interest of that company >> with the values of the ASF. And there’s the fact that not everyone is able >> to profit from Tidelift. I for example tried reaching out to them several >> times for offering commercial PLC4X support, but the only responses I got, >> were people wanting to discuss how my business could profit from using more >> open-source ;-) So for me Tidelift is not an option as not everyone can use >> it. >> >> Now let me get to my idea: >> What If there was a separate legal entity closely related to the ASF (Let’s >> call it “Support Inc.” for now). I would even propose that the oversight >> entity for Support Inc. should be the ASF board. This would assure the >> company is perfectly in-line with the ASF and its values. >> >> Individuals could sign up on Support Inc’s website for providing commercial >> services around Apache projects. These services could be Consulting, Feature >> development, Training, Commercial Support. >> On this site a user could also add possible feature-development campaigns >> with a price-tag attached, just like I did on my website. >> >> If a company wants to finance a feature, get support, consulting, or >> training around an Apache project, this would be the well-known website >> somebody would go to first. >> >> Support Inc. would provide the contracts and therefore the individual >> wouldn’t have to (I usually spent 2000-4000€/year on legal advice for stuff >> like that). Also, would Support Inc. be a bigger company the customer would >> be doing business with, which would probably ease the problem of getting >> into the companies with Chris Inc. >> >> The contracts would be between the Support Inc. and the customer, and the >> customer would pay to Support Inc. The developer would have a contract with >> Support Inc. and be paid from this but give Support Inc. a certain >> percentage of the contact to cover its expenses (But in contrast to other >> pure for-profit companies, this cut would be a lot less than usual). >> Now a developer could probably choose from different models, where he gets >> paid instantly (but then give Support Inc. a bigger cut of the profits) or >> wait for the customer to pay. >> The services the new company would provide, would be taking care of the >> payments, the legal issues and provide the infrastructure for finding >> commercial support offerings. >> And if people know this is something integrated into the general open-source >> ecosystem, I assume people would probably try less to screw with as they >> know it might backfire PR-wise, just like dragging the ASF to court wouldn’t >> be the smartest thing to do. >> >> If the company earns money, it could become a sponsor of the ASF. >> >> What do you think? >> >> I hope you’re now not going to point at me laughing because I like the idea. >> >> Chris >> >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org >
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
