From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 029BE139085 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:55:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B583114267; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:55:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-x241.google.com (mail-qt0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55E8F1423A; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:55:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-x241.google.com with SMTP id n13so33774096qtc.0; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:55:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=umecSGvPBmXWbXLz2HDZkoy804AkW0EFrhWD/V3dJJA=; b=jghvDuNAmbYufeEKTBwqg22J0dpWerVDS04IRv0xbzYrE0EkxIttsDfsa80I2aKdnX 6VhlehKqqnmo+w7uAnAxVD3AQx+8SKwzKHmhaLW6fEbaj+TWuVB0BpFQ80Zbs5RqgTJy Np2MPwVhQ0U7c/n65B6XjTFDyJru00Sn6SKIY19h+RMOnBYzbhGZhbcAc+gGCWsvRonm 4dZq2NhMnBNMO8vb3g41Fq8sJ0bSX1YPLiIa93toB0BNxN2BzeBBvPSUqzh4AbREaI9r UpaMrwrChzvlrTXp39FEcfWArbMBR/pQmOSjtCiOaljoaV1Oeks/g4wRV5nKpPIdmckf Mq1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=umecSGvPBmXWbXLz2HDZkoy804AkW0EFrhWD/V3dJJA=; b=jbJLKm7TB9zdzhF4MT/BoqCezEudHcIzgDv2YTK2sBa3Z7AX2qgldT0QNZbDtLYBs2 Fug9VrM6qqIuCAA/W/gxTJA1/eghJKcunOP1HjZChxr9wGxpWdvjkiio+ejaL/T/5AN3 kkG+unap+8lHwWffcPOmXSy4VkUs1bEUNZ16OwbMdhY5z8gDlabsKb0Ud4NtqdO9R+JZ 9WGFhCnJIIntad6fcC3y5fsNofB/Y6BG2mzdK+D04ruerOErTZkGtu2iy3NVsydYSkfY yrHOWlVK4ztFBNjUNzBWwheTF2kR3gg9lxOYiEx5/eQw6OzKxknYu2P9ONIsT67q2v0D yldA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJaeq64kdfreKNxq50YFJN/asSi+X5j8mZA2gBd3rGEC4akh7q8cc3OVugj8Tb+jpUMhEqXWi2irFaelQ== X-Received: by 10.55.33.136 with SMTP id f8mr37326010qki.132.1485377706298; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:55:06 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.16.132 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:55:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Rich Freeman Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 15:55:05 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: -ZSusyL6yv6VBQskz0YdeL8bVlA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Re: [gentoo-project] A committee to review umbrellas as a new home for Gentoo assets. To: gentoo-nfp Cc: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 8cb07a4e-4bae-4fed-9c66-f49f0104daad X-Archives-Hash: 10616997e63496718a3895319798720e On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > > If the Foundation was to be more active (raise more money, have complex > interactions, employees, etc.) then being an umbrella is risky because there > can be a lot of friction from that sort of structure. However very few > individuals seem to want a more active Foundation and I see many in the > developer community oppose such activities. So I don't see an active > Foundation as likely. > There are pros and cons to either model. IMO the Umbrella org approach could make sense in a model where this side of the distro is more active, because it lets people interested in doing things like fundraising and such focus more on that stuff (and spending the money) and less on ledgers and taxes. At least, up until a point - at some point the independent Foundation makes more sense (especially if you're talking actual employees and such). So, maybe viewed another way, here is a hierarchy of levels of sophistication: Level 0 - keep the lights on (minimal filings, follow the law, pay the hosting bills, accept paypal donations). I think an umbrella org can basically relieve anybody from doing anything more than sending them invoices and money. Level 1 - a dose of activism (crowdfunding for feature requests, bounties, some events/promotions, etc, but no employees or really expensive obligations beyond basic infra; all obligations are taken on as funds are available). I think an umbrella org is also ideal here because it lets us focus more on the high-value stuff and less on keeping the lights on. Level 2 - a serious concern (think Apache/Mozilla/etc; staff that does Gentoo stuff at least part time; ongoing obligations and operating costs that are significant). I think an umbrella org will fail hard here. At this point we need a Foundation that is probably as big as all of SPI and such. We need people full-time just making sure that the cash flow is there to pay all the bills. I think the reality is that today we struggle with Level 0 with dreams of doing Level 1. If we were ever to get to Level 2 (which seems unlikely to me) we could always form a 501c3 and have the assets transferred back to it, probably with a cleaner shot of things without the issues with the existing Foundation history. Creating a 501c3 (or something similar) wouldn't be nearly as big a problem if we really were operating at a level where we were even contemplating operating at this level, since we'd probably have near-fulltime volunteers already and a pretty big cash flow to hire the necessary expertise. I think trying to optimize for Level 2 right now just doesn't make sense. It is like a startup blowing its seed money on a huge corporate headquarters. If we become the next Mozilla that stuff will take care of itself. Now, if we get stuck and no umbrella will have us then we have no choice but to carry on, but IMO it isn't the place we want to be right now... -- Rich