>From the peanut gallery

Le ven. 21 juin 2019 à 03:16, Ross Gardler
<[email protected]> a écrit :
>
> No, that argument does not work. If code is produced we are pushing for code, 
> it's not a byproduct, it's the output.

I admittedly have strong tendencies towards pedantry, but one
definition of byproduct is: "an incidental or secondary product made
in the manufacture or synthesis of something else." Correct me if I'm
wrong, but the goal D&I is trying to achieve by engaging Outreachy is
not to produce code, but to provide groups which are currently
represented an opportunity to engage with the ASF. That is done by
collaboratively writing code, but writing code is not the primary
goal.

>
> Is be very dismayed if we were truly arguing that we can solve the D&I 
> problem simply by inflating numbers through paid engagements. That's not 
> solving anything, that's hiding it.

I don't interpret anyone's comments so far as suggesting that paid
engagements will *directly* improve D&I. As Naomi said in another
thread:

"as it stands, with open source in general, contributing requires that
you have the resources (computer, knowledge/skills, free time) to do
so. and the temperament to do so"

I'd be hesitant to call all paid engagements inflating numbers, but
even if that is the case, these paid engagements open the door for
future engagement by those who may not have otherwise connected with
the ASF.


>
> Ross
>
> Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Awasum Yannick <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 11:36:47 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Does Outreachy mean we are paying for code? Is that acceptable? 
> (was Re: Why does the ASF not pay for development?)
>
> Paying for Outreachy means we are paying for D&I. Code is a byproduct.
> Given generally the bar at Outreachy is so low.
>
> The question now should be: is D&I really important enough for us to pay
> for? I will say yes.
>
> Is paying for D&I a bad thing?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019, 02:33 Ross Gardler <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I said "watch and learn" in an earlier thread on this topic. I believe
> > that means it can be seen as knowledge gathering. At least from my point of
> > view.
> >
> > But then I see everything as knowledge gathering ;-)
> >
> > Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Sam Ruby <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 6:28:30 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Does Outreachy mean we are paying for code? Is that
> > acceptable? (was Re: Why does the ASF not pay for development?)
> >
> > Excellent subject line.  Permit me to give a different take.  But
> > first, I want to give credit to an off-hand comment made by David and
> > seeing an early draft of what Gris and Naomi are working on as
> > inspirations.
> >
> > The board approved $70K for D&I for this FY.  This is for Survey
> > Design and Contributor Experience Research.  I'll generalize a bit,
> > and say that the value we receive in return for these investments is
> > knowledge.  (See
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.apache.org%2FgiFi&amp;data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C21ba6bf79de84a51d70d08d6f612e805%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636966958400128323&amp;sdata=I3kQHVv1RfyMcQ7dZFxB3t3R7HwKuWI%2Fb5fcNpSk1q0%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > )
> >
> > The board either declined to fund or has not come to consensus on
> > Outreachy.  We went on a number of tangents, relating to Sponsors and
> > artificially limiting the set of projects that could apply.  Neither
> > achieved consensus, so let's ignore both.
> >
> > The question to pose: what if the primary value we seek to receive
> > from engaging in Outreachy was knowledge?  If that were the case,
> > would it make sense for the ASF to directly fund Outreachy at levels
> > comparable to what the board agreed to invest in Survey Design and
> > Contributor Experience Research?  What if we were to assume that any
> > code that an intern would contribute over a handful of months is
> > incidental?
> >
> > The post that Naomi and Gris will be making in the upcoming days
> > describes the knowledge that we hope to acquire from working with
> > Outreachy.
> >
> > - Sam Ruby
> >

Reply via email to