Another thing I would be interested in:
Is Tidelift continuing with the practice to select which projects are worth
providing support for?
Just asking, because we don’t just have the big projects everyone knows, but
also a load of small ones.
My experience with trying to get PLC4X listed with
sponsorships. Likewise I
> > think it would be OK to list the people who are accepting sponsorship
> from
> > Tidelift
>
> +1, and IMO such pages should include a disclaimer that there's no
> guarantee that the contributions of sponsored committers will be
> acc
Ralph Goers wrote:
> ...I personally have no problem having a project support page
> that lists the individuals who accept GitHub sponsorships. Likewise I
> think it would be OK to list the people who are accepting sponsorship from
> Tidelift
+1, and IMO such pages shou
ly break those.
>
> A bit of context here why I am interested and discussing it. It's not
> that I am arguing against Tidelift or anything like that. I am just
> very transparent and try to get this whole cooperation between
> contributors and stakeholders hashed out and defined
to avoid.
Also some people might not realise that their organisations are not
aware of the requirements and they might accidentally break those.
A bit of context here why I am interested and discussing it. It's not
that I am arguing against Tidelift or anything like that. I am just
very transp
The wording now basically says that anything listed as an obligation can
be ignored if it conflicts with your organization’s policy requirements. So
that should make it possible for individuals to agree to work with Tidelift
without the PMC agreeing to anything.
That said, I personally have no
I think the door was always open to work with Tidelift by the individuals.
This has never been a problem (and recruiting individual PMC members
by you was never a problem either).
However, yes, I do have a question now. I am actually - as a PMC
member of Apache Airflow interested. You have one of
nity since it generated so much conversation across
multiple mailing lists (including this one) back in the January-March time
frame :o)
That being said, any project committers or PMC members who want to explore
working with Tidelift to underwrite their work: the door is now open! Our
subscribers u
c notice requirement"
> which in most projects would've required an action by the project as a
> whole, counter to the (rightful) prohibition of directed development within
> ASF-hosted projects.
>
> To fix that, we added language to all of our agreements that makes it
> c
ojects.
To fix that, we added language to all of our agreements that makes it
clear: Tidelift will never ask maintainers to act in contravention with the
policies of their fiscal sponsor.
*> If your Project is formally part of a larger open source organization,
such a fiscal sponsor or other n
On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 3:51 AM Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Jared, I like your descriptions! If you replace sponsor with vendor it should
> be very familiar to us all!
First of all: +1 to Jarek's idea.
Second of all, now that I have the board's blessing to go and explor
Jared, I like your descriptions! If you replace sponsor with vendor it should
be very familiar to us all!
All the best,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 22, 2022, at 4:12 PM, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>
> Hey Roman,
>
> I like it too. Happy to help too. I think it's not very
Hey Roman,
I like it too. Happy to help too. I think it's not very far for Tidelift to
adjust their model.
Maybe what could be helpful is to have some page/policy where we describe
what can/cannot/should be from a Sponsor/PMC and contributor in exchange
for money:
I see for example (I a
Jim said:
> IMO, the foundation and the project should do nothing associated with
this. It should neither encourage or condone it. In no way should we enter
into any agreement, contract, whatever, w/ Tidelift. If Tidelift wishes to
work independently and directly w/ people, that's f
> And speaking from my extremely parochial POV as part of the SpamAssassin
> project, I know that our requests for "support" often amount to
> embedding special dispensation for sketchy practices, so I don't think
> anyone working on *OUR* project could "lift" it without telling
> subscribers "NO!"
>
> I expect I know the answer to this but do any of your sponsors require
> (or even request) that you mention them in the project web site or in the
> README?
No. And this is something I would never be able to agree to because
the agreement is with me not with PMC/project.
But for example Astron
nd the project should do nothing associated with
> > this. It should neither encourage or condone it. In no way should we
> > enter into any agreement, contract, whatever, w/ Tidelift. If Tidelift
> > wishes to work independently and directly w/ people, that's fine. But
> &
, w/ Tidelift. If Tidelift
wishes to work independently and directly w/ people, that's fine. But
having the ASF and/or the project involved at any level should be
disallowed.
+1
It seems clear to me that the Tidelift business model is not compatible
with the ASF's project structu
On 2022-01-12 at 10:41:22 UTC-0500 (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 08:41:22 -0700)
Ralph Goers
is rumored to have said:
That said, if the Tidelift model for people to be funded was “Your
project must adhere to all ASF process and guidelines AND you must
have a minimum of 3 active committers (proven by them
business model is to generate funding for open source by getting
commercial users to pay Tidelift to support open source projects. Tidelift
doesn’t seem to have any developers of its own so it shares a portion of
he money it gets with projects so it can add them to its catalog of supported
projects
reements with the stakeholders, PMC members
are aware of those (I am very transparent with that as you see), but
it has nothing to do with the PMC nor ASF..
I believe if Tidelift were to arrange similar contracts with whoever
are the people with "merit" in the project, they should be free
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 4:50 PM Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Recently the Logging Services PMC was approached by Tidelift offering to
> provide monetary support either to the project or individual committers. To
> obtain that sponsorship the project has to agr
> On Jan 12, 2022, at 10:41 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
> While I agree with your conclusion I do disagree with how you get there.
>
> In your first message you seemed to think that the “self-serving nature” of
> what Tidelift is doing is any different than
person receiving funds from Tidelift. It isn’t clear if the PMC was ever even
consulted.
> 2- Is the concept of "guarantying" here in the Legal sense ? or is it
> "guarantying" by approaching the "right individuals" ?
>
> By "right individua
Jim,
While I agree with your conclusion I do disagree with how you get there.
In your first message you seemed to think that the “self-serving nature” of
what Tidelift is doing is any different than what many companies have been
doing to the ASF. I am a member of the Flume PMC and my employer
eing donated
> to the project was, in fact, being donated; that this external
> work-for-hire was allowed to be, and was intended to be, donated and used
> by the ASF under the ALv2.
>
> If Tidelift wishes to contract out to individuals, it is certainly within
> its rights and that&#
allowed to be, and was
intended to be, donated and used by the ASF under the ALv2.
If Tidelift wishes to contract out to individuals, it is certainly within its
rights and that's 100% A-OK. However, they must be aware that there is no
guarantee that any work that the "lifters"
On 1/12/22 09:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
I agree that people should handle their affairs as they see fit RE Tidelift
but how should this be allowed to trickle in on Apache WRT mentions in web
sites and files like readme. IOW, should structs assets remove mentions of
Tidelift?
Yes. The
I agree that people should handle their affairs as they see fit RE Tidelift
but how should this be allowed to trickle in on Apache WRT mentions in web
sites and files like readme. IOW, should structs assets remove mentions of
Tidelift?
Gary
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022, 08:52 Jim Jagielski wrote
IMO, the foundation and the project should do nothing associated with this. It
should neither encourage or condone it. In no way should we enter into any
agreement, contract, whatever, w/ Tidelift. If Tidelift wishes to work
independently and directly w/ people, that's fine. But having th
ervices PMC was approached by Tidelift offering to
provide monetary support either to the project or individual committers. To
obtain that sponsorship the project has to agree to the terms at
https://support.tidelift.com/hc/en-us/articles/4406309657876-Lifter-agreement.
It appears that Struts ha
Hello all,
Recently the Logging Services PMC was approached by Tidelift offering to
provide monetary support either to the project or individual committers. To
obtain that sponsorship the project has to agree to the terms at
https://support.tidelift.com/hc/en-us/articles/4406309657876-Lifter
32 matches
Mail list logo
