1 |
I tend to fully agree to the following comments made by Scott here. |
2 |
|
3 |
On Mon, 2004-04-12 at 22:51, Scott W Taylor wrote: |
4 |
> On Mon, 2004-04-12 at 18:39, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
5 |
> > Hi guys, |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > Here is a very short summary of the NFP progress so far: |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > 1) I have committed to get something going by the end of this month (April.) |
10 |
> > This would be either an establishment of an NFP, or some kind of action plan |
11 |
> > to set up multiple entities like a NFP with one or more cooperatives to |
12 |
> > provide funding. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Letting the people that care about and feel they would be affected by |
15 |
> such changes is as important to me as the final outcome. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> > 2) The main issue of concern for me is (obviously) not getting the NFP set |
18 |
> > up as soon as humanly possible but making sure that whatever is really best |
19 |
> > for the Gentoo community, as it is very hard to change things once things |
20 |
> > have been established. |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > This has been very difficult because I have been trying to meet many |
23 |
> > conflicting and contradictory expectations of users and developers: |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > A) Expectation: Gentoo will be competitive against Microsoft |
26 |
> > Reality: Microsoft spends $6.8 Billion USD on R&D every year. |
27 |
> ... |
28 |
> re: comment in meeting about how users become the testbed for unstable |
29 |
> linux software: so are Microsoft users, but linux users aren't required |
30 |
> to pay to be tested on. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> > B) Expectation: I want to be able to work on Gentoo full-time. |
33 |
> > Reality: As time goes on, Linux and free software is getting |
34 |
> > supported more |
35 |
> ... |
36 |
> > Good question. These big companies will want some return on their |
37 |
> > dollar, so they |
38 |
> > will expect you to do what *they* want and not what you want. |
39 |
> ... |
40 |
> This is precisely why i feel uneasy about a largely money-backed |
41 |
> operation being in control of gentoo. Even if current or former gentoo |
42 |
> people end up running it for the first year. |
43 |
> ... |
44 |
> > C) Expectation: Gentoo should be representative of user needs. |
45 |
> > Reality: Having an open participatory model makes it easier for |
46 |
> > external entities (such as the dreaded Microsoft) to co-opt (ie take over) the entity. |
47 |
> ... |
48 |
> As opposed to one that can be bought into? The current "open |
49 |
> participatory" model involves people participating and giving back to |
50 |
> the community to even get in. Participation may be open but it requires |
51 |
> a little more than just a checkbook. |
52 |
> |
53 |
> > D) Expectation: Gentoo should be set up to protect against co-option. |
54 |
> > Reality: This requires a closed and non-participatory |
55 |
> ... |
56 |
> I've worked as a federal contractor, and in a small office run out of a |
57 |
> glorified condo out in the woods, and many places inbetween. The common |
58 |
> thread was that when people felt things were being run fairly and |
59 |
> equitably, they were much more willing to put in the overtime and not |
60 |
> complain about feeling slighted. One day, that little company in the |
61 |
> woods got acquired by a venture-capital-backed startup headed up by |
62 |
> former vice presidents of various banks and mortgage companies. After |
63 |
> the takeover, people got pathetic 2% raises and were told straight up |
64 |
> that it'd be the last raise for another year. So, we no longer had much |
65 |
> of a say in the organization, while we kept hearing about all the money |
66 |
> they were spending on the marble fountains for the out-of-state |
67 |
> corporate offices we'd never see or use. |
68 |
> ... |
69 |
> > E) Expectation: We should have 501(c)(3) status |
70 |
> > Reality: I have learned that 501(c)(3) status is for charities. |
71 |
> ... |
72 |
> > 3) Several major universities are in negotiation about setting up some kind |
73 |
> > of entity to fund Gentoo development, and I am participating in some of |
74 |
> > these discussions. |
75 |
> .......... |
76 |
> Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of the coop, I like seeing a way to |
77 |
> help push along various open-source projects, even more so if Gentoo was |
78 |
> to be their flagship platform - the one that gets the most, or first |
79 |
> shot at benefits from any development or promotions that come from |
80 |
> having an actual budget. |
81 |
> |
82 |
> Something I've always respected about open source projects is that |
83 |
> contributions are mostly merit-based. If someone wants to contribute, |
84 |
> and they have good code, they are in. Sure, its somewhat of a utopian |
85 |
> view, as personality conflicts can get in the way. But truly open |
86 |
> projects have been this way for quite some time. When I first started |
87 |
> contributing fractal algorithms and printer drivers to fractint, and |
88 |
> even introduced a publisher to the whole concept (the book "Fractal |
89 |
> Creations" and a few others were the result of this). By the way, I was |
90 |
> 14 when I did this. I could not have bought my way into an organization |
91 |
> then, and was discriminated right out of any real office, but online it |
92 |
> didn't matter. |
93 |
> |
94 |
> My vote for gentoo as a distribution is to keep it pure. I have a vested |
95 |
> interest in keeping it running as well as it possibly can, because I use |
96 |
> it. Its my desktop, its my server, its my laptop. We already are |
97 |
> responsive to users, from bugzilla and other sources. There are people |
98 |
> out there making sure it runs well. Its not because they bought in to a |
99 |
> coop, its because they already care about the product. |
100 |
> |
101 |
> If you can get corporations and universities to chip in to a fund that |
102 |
> can help get better drivers built, or even show hardware manufacturers |
103 |
> that there is a presence out there aside from just ibm that wants linux |
104 |
> to succeed, and can better coax vendors to release open drivers for |
105 |
> (video, network, firewire, etc) hardware, or allow interested developers |
106 |
> to do so without resorting to trying to reverse-engineer their gear, |
107 |
> then that would be great too. But since not all that money will be going |
108 |
> directly to gentoo, I feel that there would be fewer concerns about how |
109 |
> a money-based organization, even if its called a coop, would have |
110 |
> somewhat of a conflict of interest with gentoo itself. |
111 |
> |
112 |
> If gentoo was declared a NFP, even though it might be more restrictive, |
113 |
> it sounds to me like that would be just the thing to help keep gentoo |
114 |
> pure by forcing the books to stay clean, and still giving universities a |
115 |
> charitable way to write off equipment and bandwidth which is helping us |
116 |
> and our users. And if they can afford to chip in to the organization |
117 |
> that funds development to further the growth and stability of linux |
118 |
> (including gentoo), then that is a great thing too. Although those two |
119 |
> things have a symbiotic relationship and benefit from each other, they |
120 |
> do not have identical goals and motivations, and for that reason I feel |
121 |
> they should be separate entities. It is important to have a clear focus. |
122 |
> Being pulled in two directions at once is likely to cause a rift. |
123 |
> |
124 |
> ... |
125 |
> > You will need to choose between an "open, participatory" (and co-optable) |
126 |
> > and a "closed, non-co-optable" (and non-representative/unfair) governing |
127 |
> > model. So let me know which you prefer and I'll get it set up. The other |
128 |
> > alternative is to try to find some kind of compromise, where the government |
129 |
> > for the not-for-profit isn't too fair or open, but is more bureaucratic and |
130 |
> > harder to co-opt. Let me know which one appeals to you. |
131 |
> > |
132 |
> > Sincerely, |
133 |
> > |
134 |
> > Daniel |
135 |
> > -- |
136 |
> > gentoo-nfp@g.o mailing list |
137 |
-- |
138 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
139 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |