Hi all,

As I was confronted with the question of how commercial support or paid feature 
development and Apache would work together. I came up with this way of handling 
it:
If I am offering any form of commercial support or feature development I say: 
"I will fix your problem. The fix then can become part of the open-source 
project, but if the project decides to decline It, I'll make it available to 
you in a fork that I create for you." This should work for Tidelift or any 
similar form of platform too.

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> 
Sent: Montag, 28. Februar 2022 19:24
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Effective ways of getting individuals funded to work on ASF 
projects

Tidelift's model, which expects that maintainers do have direct and almost 
unassailable control over a project, is not compatible with the Apache Way. 
Tidelift's model works well with projects in which developers and maintainers 
can "do stuff" without worrying about building a consensus around whether or 
not their contributions are OK or not.

I'd like to see how that model and Apache could fit together, but I'm at a loss 
to think about how. The main benefit that those who fund the work is not just 
an expectation that code will be fixed, etc, but a *requirement* that it be 
done. They are paying for the guarantee. This requires a development model in 
which those paid by Tidelift can forcibly introduce code and contributions at 
will. This conflicts with the ASF development model.

> On Feb 28, 2022, at 12:50 PM, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> 
>> So while I agree with everything Bertrand said I don’t think it 
>> resolves
> the real issue.
> TideLift is providing a guarantee to its customers that projects it 
> sponsors meet certain standards. The standards they are looking for 
> should really be set by the ASF, not individual projects.
> 
> This is the part I do not understand. What Tidelift can promise to 
> their customers and on what basis?
> According to ASF rules where only individuals in the project can make 
> decisions - this means that Tidelift has no mechanisms whatsoever to 
> fulfill their promise.
> 
> And if ASF sets the standards - why do we need Tidelift at all ?
> To be perfectly blunt -  I am afraid that until Tidelift resolves any 
> of the real problems of individual committers we mentioned with 
> Bertrand (including facilitating direct relationship commiter <> 
> stakeholder), I do not see what's the added value of Tidelift. Seems 
> like unnecessary intermediary.
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:10 PM Ralph Goers 
> <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> First, I would like to clarify Gary’s email as I don’t think he 
>> characterized it quite correctly.
>> The Logging PMC concluded we could not be part of an arrangement with 
>> TideLift and that the issues needed to be worked out at the 
>> foundation level. The primary issue was that TideLift had 
>> requirements on advertising and process details that required 
>> approval of the PMC in order for individuals to be able to be paid. 
>> We met with a Google security team in January and had similar issues 
>> where they required a process that isn’t aligned with the ASF’s 
>> requirements on how releases are to be performed.
>> 
>> Second, from my point of view the ASF should have discussions with 
>> TideLift and Google to see if those issues can be resolved. The ideal 
>> scenario would be that TideLift and Google can simply sponsor 
>> individuals from any ASF project because all ASF projects must 
>> conform to guidelines that meet their criteria - i.e. the PMC doesn’t 
>> even have to be involved. But this obviously requires that the 
>> foundation work with these third parties to either improve our 
>> processes where needed or get the third party to accept our 
>> processes.
>> 
>> So while I agree with everything Bertrand said I don’t think it 
>> resolves the real issue.
>> TideLift is providing a guarantee to its customers that projects it 
>> sponsors meet certain standards. The standards they are looking for 
>> should really be set by the ASF, not individual projects.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 28, 2022, at 5:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz 
>>> <bdelacre...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Le lun. 28 févr. 2022 à 11:06, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> a écrit :
>>>> ...the relationships I have is direct relationship with the 
>>>> stakeholders. Let's deel, GitHub Sponsors, SAP Ariba are merely
>> "removing
>>>> bureaucratic obstacles" but they are not "between" me and my
>> stakeholders.
>>>> They are "on a side". They get a small cut sometimes (which I 
>>>> gladly
>> pay)
>>>> but I want to talk to the stakeholders directly without any
>> intermediaries
>>>> and establish a long-term relationship with them as an individual....
>>> 
>>> I think that's a key point, and listing such requirements for 
>>> platforms that can help our contributors get funding sounds useful.
>>> 
>>> Here's a quick list of initial requirements that we might include:
>>> -Contributors can get steady funding for their work -ASF is out of 
>>> the loop of financial transactions -Contributors must use a standard 
>>> ASF disclaimer (draft at [1]) -Contributors can establish a direct 
>>> relationship with sponsors -Several "funding intermediaries" are 
>>> available -ASF might define the wording that contributors can use 
>>> when advertising themselves (based on facts, etc.)
>>> 
>>> I like the idea of the ASF facilitating these things.
>>> 
>>> Maintaining a comdev page that lists criteria like the above, with 
>>> pointers to the relevant ASF policies, and lists intermediaries that 
>>> our contributors have successfully used, might be a good start.
>>> 
>>> -Bertrand
>>> 
>>> [1] https://community.apache.org/committers/funding-disclaimer.html
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>> 
>> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org

Reply via email to