Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Council vs Umbrella Corp ?

[james]

On 8/29/20 4:49 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 3:47 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
>>
>> As a member of the council, I'll be the first to say I don't know
>> anything about trustee functions. For me, the question is, do we want to
>> control our own destiny as an organization or do we want to have another
>> organization control it in some way? To be honest, I do not have that
>> answer because I don't know how much control an umbrella organization
>> would try to exert, and since they would control our purse strings, I
>> don't know what the scope of control they would be able to exert is.

An overlord is always a BAD idea. ymmv. WE, gentoo at large would have 
little to say, if they change their fees, requirements and foundational 
goals. No Thanks.

> I certainly share the concern, though I also have concerns about our
> own sustainability, and I'll note that some of that issue about purse
> strings also applies with a separate Foundation, simply because the
> distro are the Foundation are still separate entities, though
> obviously we have a bit more control over the latter.

Put all of the finances in GNUcash, and make read access available ? 
The best way, in my experience, is to put the data into the system, 
concurrently with the expenditure and transactions, and make viewing 
access available, widely. That sort of behaving gets you on the IRS 
pristine list. Filing transactions much later than occurrence, or 
manually, is a red flag. Keeping the eyes of the members on the finances 
.................... Priceless.


> A lot of this stuff has been discussed on the -nfp and -project lists
> extensively, so I won't rehash it all.


Perhaps a read only mechanism could publish all of that financial data? 
Perhaps timely data entry, should be a requirement?

>
> * We tend to insist on using FOSS ledger formats which a lot of CPAs
> probably don't want to deal with.

GNU cash is robust and puts out data and reports in wide variety of 
forms acceptable by most CPA firms. I'd like to know the details what 
your mean by FOSS Ledger formats?


> * With the huge compliance issues up until now the main emphasis was
> getting it done right over getting it done inexpensively.

Very wise decision.

> The issues
> up until now are basically an existential threat, and we're sitting on
> a lot of cash, so trying to save $1k and potentially losing access to
> tens of thousands of dollars in the process due to legal issues isn't
> wise.

agreed

>
> * After the initial filings were caught up there was some discussion
> around changing accountants to save money.  The thinking is that we
> wanted to get a bit more traction/experience with getting things done
> right before we start making changes.  The reality is that we have a
> lot of money right now and while I agree with mgorny's concern that we
> can't just assume we'll continue to have it, for the short term I
> think the emphasis should be on figuring out the future state before
> getting tied up with making the current state more efficient.  If the
> long-term ends up being to keep the Foundation around then of course
> making it more robust/efficient makes sense.

Can/will you summarize the collective reason to get rid of the 
Foundation or any other component of Gentoo management? If they are not 
being paid, why the rush to terminate?

Are there resources for access to those discussions, meeting minutes 
notes and such? Audio recording of meetings or some sort of summary?


> Finally, I'll share a personal opinion that I've already elaborated on
> elsewhere.  I think the best thing we could do to secure our future is
> to reduce our reliance on having money at all.  Plenty of projects get
> by with nothing more than a github/gitlab/whatever cloud-based repo.
> Certainly having our infra gives us more options, but it also makes us
> more dependent on money, and with money comes all the red tape.

True, but having a multi-faceted organization exists, because many other 
organizations, with out multiplicity, have gotten into trouble, were 
abused internally, and simply fail due to poor over-site.  For me, 
funding is the only issue to reduce these over-site functional 
components. What you are suggesting has occurred many times with gentoo, 
in replicated efforts. Most have failed, but some, line Funtoo, are 
thriving. If there is funding, why take the risk at this time?


> Aiming for a more cloud-based infra that anybody can clone/fork/etc
> means that even if github shuts us down somebody just has to create a
> new repo someplace else and do a push.

I'm no fan of 'the cloud'. If you believe what many are saying, the 
cloud has stopped growing. Not the time, but I'm totally against the 
cloud. I am helping dozens of companies get off of cloud dependence, for 
a wide variety of reasons. ymmv.

  >Commoditizing the infra and
> investing our efforts into the actual distro seems like the better
> strategy to be secure.  And if we want to host that stuff ourselves
> that is ok too, but the key is that if somebody takes down our bug
> tracker we have a dozen devs who are already keeping their own forks
> of it based on publicly-accessible backups and one just has to make it
> public to pick up without interruption.

Redundancy, is a key component of most all of computer science. Trust, 
but verify, is another fundamental tenant. If your want formal 
references, its under the blanket term of 'Fault Tolerance'. I write 
this for the benefit of all readers.


> Basically we need to think smaller, not bigger.  Stuff that involves
> money should be a nice-to-have, not a must-have.

More Details and let the voting eligible decide? It is quite trivial to 
setup finances with core needs and the all of this other functions. 
Restricting interactions and dev status, without rights to over-site, is 
a very bad idea. Many techs have made lots of money, and are poor and 
living paycheck to paycheck. You really think it's a good idea to have 
them manage Gentoo? I'd minimally add an outstanding credit score, say 
900, to be eligible to make financial decisions on Gentoo's future.


> It isn't unlike achieving financial independence/security.  The most
> efficient thing any individual can do to increase their personal
> financial security is to reduce their recurring spending - you don't
> need a strategy to generate income that is purely discretionary.
, is allow with votes of the members.

Really? I totally disagree. The best thing is to make money. Then get 
your domicile paid off 100%. In Gentoo case, the domicile is several 19" 
racks full of servers and power conditioning, switches, etc etc.  The 
cloud has some severe security issues.

Never borrow money against the domicile. Continue to make money. Spend 
wisely. There is a time to be financially conservative, and a time to 
invest. Having someone, with piss-poor personal finances making any sort 
of financial decision with Gentoo funding semantics, is a recipe for 
fraud. Double dipping?

Credit scores are the mark of excellence, that's why they are 
universally used by the astute. I'm not sure how Gentoo is anything 
other than a 501-c charity? What form of organization/filing does Gentoo 
ascribe to?

Tech ventures are no exception and in fact may be more in need of 
individuals with extreme financial integrity.

Conclusively, make few changes atm with Gentoo. Let's flush out many of 
the details, or make the postings of these aforementioned groups 
published, so they can be read by all.  Seriously, I'd think this is, is 
the premier place to discuss such matters. ymmv.

Finally, Rich, your commitment to Gentoo, is well documented and greatly 
appreciated. Many on this list are quite astute with business matters. 
If fact Gentoo is a collective, of very accomplished computer types, the 
associated finances is something many have experience with, here at 
Gentoo. WE can help, and reinforce wise, open decisions. A realtime 
mechanism for thousands of eyes to follow expenditures, is way past due, 
imho.


hth,
James