On 23/05/2019 16:54, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> In that example the potential conflict of interest comes from the
>> individual's
> employment with the third party organisation, not because they are fellows.
>
> Do you disagree with my contention that the OMC represents the project, and
> not the fellows?
The OMC represents the official voice of the project. The OMC contracts the
fellows to work on the project and in the interests of the project. Any
interests that the fellows have by virtue of the fact that they are fellows
*are* the interests of the project.
They may have other interests external to that (e.g. personal interests). This
is true of any committer, except most committers also have an additional set of
interests they inherit from their employer. This is not the case for the
fellows.
What is important is that there should be no conflict between the interests of
the project and any other interests an individual may have.
If a fellow has a conflict of interest then it will not be *because* they are a
fellow. It will be because of some external factor. Therefore making a policy
that requires the fellows to not review each others code just because they are
fellows is pointless and counter productive. A broader policy about conflicts of
interests in general that could apply to any committer (that might include
fellows in certain circumstances such as your hypothetical example), may be
appropriate.
Matt
