| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> | Gentoo is and will remain independent volunteer work. We will never |
| 3 |
> | pay anyone to develop Gentoo, nor will we accept any donations given |
| 4 |
> | on the condition of any particular development. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
This text, as-is, does not make much sense to me. Why wouldn't |
| 7 |
Gentoo-affiliated leadership pay someone to help develop Gentoo? Why |
| 8 |
would we not accept donations for some particular body of work, as |
| 9 |
long as we think that body of work will move the project forward? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> The main idea is to protect volunteers spending their time on Gentoo. |
| 12 |
> I don't want to learn one day that my opinion doesn't matter anymore |
| 13 |
> because a new lead (Council, Trustees, Board, BDFL or any other |
| 14 |
> possible future form) decides that they/he/she will use the donation |
| 15 |
> money to hire paid workers doing the Gentoo work that they desire. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
How is your opinion mattering connected to some lead deciding that |
| 18 |
they want to use money to help Gentoo (from their perspective)? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If you're worried that some corporate power will start paying a |
| 21 |
majority of people on the Council or Board, that seems like a more |
| 22 |
reasonable concern (though I have not seen any indications that it |
| 23 |
will happen anytime soon), and maybe we can put something in place to |
| 24 |
ensure that Council and/or Board can remain diverse enough to prevent |
| 25 |
this sort of problem. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> I should note that this doesn't mean to prevent anyone from being paid |
| 28 |
> by third parties to work on Gentoo, or receive any money on account of |
| 29 |
> what he did or is doing for Gentoo. I think that's fine as long as |
| 30 |
> the wider Gentoo community has the right to reject any work that it |
| 31 |
> sees unfit. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
What are you talking about with this "right to reject"? We already |
| 34 |
grant each developer pretty much the authority to move the project |
| 35 |
forward whatever way they like, without knowing whether or not they've |
| 36 |
been paid for it -- which is just as well, since we mostly don't |
| 37 |
really care. Except when some other developer or project doesn't like |
| 38 |
it anymore, in which case we have a discussion about it on the mailing |
| 39 |
list. How do you foresee that becoming impossible? What's the exact |
| 40 |
scenario you're worried about, here? |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Cheers, |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Dirkjan |
Archives