From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-10354-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CD7F15800F
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 16:11:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 34A79E0905;
Sat, 18 Feb 2023 16:10:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2f])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3697E0903
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 16:10:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2f.google.com with SMTP id g18so953070ybc.4
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 18 Feb 2023 08:10:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=H7GpR/AWwEpfgzU16wNh1uf/1QJU2jSyBO7e1d0uOd8=;
b=qH8/8PWXEbPJ5lZa5g/bwzEBvIsEJGdrhmLbkweceOS//w02ybyPqM5TqU69XyknrE
mdgD6c3A7/IyJpwRo94GanaLSM3/drrm3shKp+/GlWpsytXGVh/jOFHv9BJWQSJift3E
kpjq9wpru6TBpiYaEpXNgTyyOmflotEKGt6FAeql0aPeD2Hpr9hEKGZwuU7vf34zByV9
0kg3tOB0d50ArTzMtNXTDZ8BDXOl9hgtXKtD+wH5kLUCINSMmwuuF7cHJFmGkCh9aJ/z
Ag1ovL0cxtFxMiUenHZlUQxT0y//M/Jg7B/kGZDqqPN8Fq9hvnP5WU73Oxfc/lwyieGg
SJ4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to;
bh=H7GpR/AWwEpfgzU16wNh1uf/1QJU2jSyBO7e1d0uOd8=;
b=nO7yR1hDnJHVndVTnHq/tFNdSTAQdxDWUYhA3Ok47qZMShBhthY2ZSyu8ohdgfO0gh
xKG4kMQm/8tqlVNIo4kqGAEpc+DwAbkiLnbhTQlwLFetvO63F9jIH8SO8IGwvVn3X3C3
N3Ox7RAhqmNpJjtVdxtWOnFGfvcp+vl77T76aVWEXX8ZPf9Bovqc5+JVP5C97nvkgjZ+
VmwTMumP/3y0WvCNZ9o7vimGzE3yinf3IpuWEo4P4yfhm3as3ew34l3YlxUb3gRtn+1C
Kt+YnSZ6xYPnhhm5fzUfWyKmLO0urPyT64gj72GkfCX/p8BJTvGyqpJq+Heo3F1o1Wd+
BYiw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVyL+1is4oOGKRuXP9eDIIO/u6g4MiL7gQiXNObhEpZSQJDeOR/
jjhVlEc2nac++vUxMDOBee2zrXVm/ZfOE3fkrUVplArL
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set82fsXynHhS9GVpazDteSDwzUSL+98yfjGAUkn8CSJ3dpgy1Lduh1uenoWTQDysqRsVjSGTcS/Dw3kXl8cq0bs=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:9189:0:b0:96c:c73d:5f7d with SMTP id
w9-20020a259189000000b0096cc73d5f7dmr632588ybl.19.1676736649622; Sat, 18 Feb
2023 08:10:49 -0800 (PST)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Y+0tKi/ONMOyro6U@sysrq.in> <48104a1d-cfea-a792-337a-0f005ad76af0@gentoo.org>
<CAGfcS_nc7nq0HVZ289rk+82HcADwr-SGae0EwOju2GoL6J0vSQ@mail.gmail.com>
<4b4368c9-050c-40d8-62c1-d3d55d6c20e3@gentoo.org> <CAAr7Pr_f=G-stHRHisRrMV8d65NHLcE-iTc_3cfOB6bogug5TQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAr7Pr_f=G-stHRHisRrMV8d65NHLcE-iTc_3cfOB6bogug5TQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Santiago Ferreira <santiago.ferreira@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2023 13:10:37 -0300
Message-ID: <CAHdwBF5_cvnGJgTGCtu8F7ESLK9vq86BDvmAsPnSvLw0DRf9Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Encourage donations to Gentoo developers
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>, Anna <cyber+gentoo@sysrq.in>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000061fa1505f4fbacad"
X-Archives-Salt: cf761e0d-30b2-478f-ac64-9ac1ce48149f
X-Archives-Hash: b4af63cd7ffa65fe4807b3857cbd407c
--00000000000061fa1505f4fbacad
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello community, I'm not the most active person, I read the email list and
the forum, please keep them, last year at MozFest I found
https://webmonetization.org/ , that's the most open way that I believe that
could be good to developers, could be something to talk this year at
MozFest https://www.mozillafestival.org/en/ let's think in different ways
to promote Gentoo
Santiago
El jue., 16 de febrero de 2023 4:45 p. m., Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org>
escribi=C3=B3:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 3:02 PM Maciej Bar=C4=87 <xgqt@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rich!
> >
> > Thanks a lot for reminding the reason why the GF "payments" are a bad
> idea.
> >
> > Do you know what is GF's stance on funding "local" dev HW? I think
> > people inside toolchain/chromium/firefox or other projects requiring a
> > lot of computation power to run various compilation/test configurations
> > could use HW provided/sponsored by the Foundation.
>
> Again, for transparency, I am President of the Gentoo Foundation.
>
> I think we have traditionally two options here:
> - One is we buy hardware, it's owned by Gentoo (Foundation) and we
> operate it as our asset. We typically do not deploy assets to people's
> homes because there is risk (of that person going away) and because
> the benefit of 'local' hardware are experienced by one person (the
> person in that locality). So value-wise having a 'local' asset is very
> similar to having a hosted asset.
> - The second is we buy hardware and basically give it to someone.
> This has a few other problems:
> - Accounting paperwork for having that person as a vendor; the
> developer should likely be treating that machine as income; paying
> taxes on it, etc.
> - Ethical considerations on allocation of Foundation resources
> (fairness, basically.)
>
> We have traditionally offered hosted resources, which we have done in
> the past and continue to endeavour to do.
> We also have the nitrokey program, where we purchase assets and ship
> them directly to developers:
> - This is an equal access program, everyone is eligible for 1
> Foundation provided Nitrokey and we ensure we have enough funds to
> cover the entire cost of that program.
> - Accounting and logistics-wise, the items are so small and so costly
> to run logistics for, we just choose not to do it (so developers who
> leave do not ship their keys back to us.)
> - It's probable that technically the developers who leave Gentoo
> should record the value of the nitrokey as income, but in most
> jurisdictions the cost is so small it doesn't matter anyway.
>
> I don't believe we have enough money to buy everyone a local
> development rig, and I'm not really sure that program really adds
> significant value over a hosted solution, so I'd likely frame any
> local development around that value-delivery conversation.
>
> -A
>
> >
> > On 2/15/23 23:50, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 5:36 PM Maciej Bar=C4=87 <xgqt@gentoo.org> wr=
ote:
> > >>
> > >> I've also heard that GF will never touch this because it is against
> the
> > >> foundation's laws, "because Gentoo cannot pay itself"... shrug.
> > >
> > > No such legal/formal restriction exists (the bylaws even have some
> > > provisions for employees (we don't have any)), but there are many
> > > reasons that this can get messy.
> > >
> > > I personally think it would make way more sense to just make it easy
> > > for developers to list some kind of info about how to donate to them,
> > > and just leave it all up to individuals.
> > >
> > > Offhand some issues with Gentoo handing out "salaries" or anything
> > > close to it are:
> > >
> > > 1. There will be endless debates over who gets how much. Some
> > > obviously do more than others, and so you either pay everybody the
> > > same and hear grumbling about inactive devs, or pay people based on
> > > activity and then have grumbling or manipulation of the metrics.
> > > 2. Gentoo just doesn't bring in that much money in the first place, s=
o
> > > it would be a lot of arguing over what probably will end up being $50
> > > here and $100 there.
> > > 3. Now you have a ton of tax overhead, potentially in many
> > > jurisdictions. Reimbursing expenses at least in the US isn't taxed,
> > > but when you start paying people for contributions you have a bunch o=
f
> > > legal issues.
> > > 4. Then you just have the general volunteer culture. Gentoo currentl=
y
> > > is an all-volunteer organization, and as such has a certain culture.
> > > If you look at FOSS organizations that tend to pay substantial amount=
s
> > > of people you end up with professional management and so on. That
> > > isn't necessarily a bad thing but it is a big change.
> > >
> > > It just is an issue that I don't think anybody wants to go near. If
> > > people want to donate to their favorite dev I doubt anybody would be
> > > bothered. It just doesn't make sense to have the foundation operate
> > > as a payment processor when you have lots of companies that offer
> > > exactly that service, or things like cryptocurrency if you want to go
> > > that route.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Have a great day!
> >
> > ~ Maciej XGQT Bar=C4=87
> >
> > xgqt@gentoo.org
> > Gentoo Linux developer
> > (emacs, math, ml, scheme, sci)
>
>
--00000000000061fa1505f4fbacad
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">Hello community, I'm not the most active person, I re=
ad the email list and the forum, please keep them, last year at MozFest I f=
ound=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://webmonetization.org/" rel=3D"noreferrer norefe=
rrer" target=3D"_blank">https://webmonetization.org/</a> , that's the m=
ost open way that I believe that could be good to developers, could be some=
thing to talk this year at MozFest=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://www.mozillafesti=
val.org/en/">https://www.mozillafestival.org/en/</a> let's think in dif=
ferent ways to promote Gentoo<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">=
Santiago=C2=A0</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" c=
lass=3D"gmail_attr">El jue., 16 de febrero de 2023 4:45 p. m., Alec Warner =
<<a href=3D"mailto:antarus@gentoo.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer nore=
ferrer" target=3D"_blank">antarus@gentoo.org</a>> escribi=C3=B3:<br></di=
v><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:=
1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 3:02 PM Maciej Bar=
=C4=87 <<a href=3D"mailto:xgqt@gentoo.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer =
noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">xgqt@gentoo.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi Rich!<br>
><br>
> Thanks a lot for reminding the reason why the GF "payments" =
are a bad idea.<br>
><br>
> Do you know what is GF's stance on funding "local" dev H=
W? I think<br>
> people inside toolchain/chromium/firefox or other projects requiring a=
<br>
> lot of computation power to run various compilation/test configuration=
s<br>
> could use HW provided/sponsored by the Foundation.<br>
<br>
Again, for transparency, I am President of the Gentoo Foundation.<br>
<br>
I think we have traditionally two options here:<br>
=C2=A0- One is we buy hardware, it's owned by Gentoo (Foundation) and w=
e<br>
operate it as our asset. We typically do not deploy assets to people's<=
br>
homes because there is risk (of that person going away) and because<br>
the benefit of 'local' hardware are experienced by one person (the<=
br>
person in that locality). So value-wise having a 'local' asset is v=
ery<br>
similar to having a hosted asset.<br>
=C2=A0- The second is we buy hardware and basically give it to someone.<br>
This has a few other problems:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0- Accounting paperwork for having that person as a vendor; the=
<br>
developer should likely be treating that machine as income; paying<br>
taxes on it, etc.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0- Ethical considerations on allocation of Foundation resources=
<br>
(fairness, basically.)<br>
<br>
We have traditionally offered hosted resources, which we have done in<br>
the past and continue to endeavour to do.<br>
We also have the nitrokey program, where we purchase assets and ship<br>
them directly to developers:<br>
=C2=A0- This is an equal access program, everyone is eligible for 1<br>
Foundation provided Nitrokey and we ensure we have enough funds to<br>
cover the entire cost of that program.<br>
=C2=A0- Accounting and logistics-wise, the items are so small and so costly=
<br>
to run logistics for, we just choose not to do it (so developers who<br>
leave do not ship their keys back to us.)<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0- It's probable that technically the developers who leave =
Gentoo<br>
should record the value of the nitrokey as income, but in most<br>
jurisdictions the cost is so small it doesn't matter anyway.<br>
<br>
I don't believe we have enough money to buy everyone a local<br>
development rig, and I'm not really sure that program really adds<br>
significant value over a hosted solution, so I'd likely frame any<br>
local development around that value-delivery conversation.<br>
<br>
-A<br>
<br>
><br>
> On 2/15/23 23:50, Rich Freeman wrote:<br>
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 5:36 PM Maciej Bar=C4=87 <<a href=3D"m=
ailto:xgqt@gentoo.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" =
target=3D"_blank">xgqt@gentoo.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> >><br>
> >> I've also heard that GF will never touch this because it =
is against the<br>
> >> foundation's laws, "because Gentoo cannot pay itself=
"... shrug.<br>
> ><br>
> > No such legal/formal restriction exists (the bylaws even have som=
e<br>
> > provisions for employees (we don't have any)), but there are =
many<br>
> > reasons that this can get messy.<br>
> ><br>
> > I personally think it would make way more sense to just make it e=
asy<br>
> > for developers to list some kind of info about how to donate to t=
hem,<br>
> > and just leave it all up to individuals.<br>
> ><br>
> > Offhand some issues with Gentoo handing out "salaries" =
or anything<br>
> > close to it are:<br>
> ><br>
> > 1. There will be endless debates over who gets how much.=C2=A0 So=
me<br>
> > obviously do more than others, and so you either pay everybody th=
e<br>
> > same and hear grumbling about inactive devs, or pay people based =
on<br>
> > activity and then have grumbling or manipulation of the metrics.<=
br>
> > 2. Gentoo just doesn't bring in that much money in the first =
place, so<br>
> > it would be a lot of arguing over what probably will end up being=
$50<br>
> > here and $100 there.<br>
> > 3. Now you have a ton of tax overhead, potentially in many<br>
> > jurisdictions.=C2=A0 Reimbursing expenses at least in the US isn&=
#39;t taxed,<br>
> > but when you start paying people for contributions you have a bun=
ch of<br>
> > legal issues.<br>
> > 4. Then you just have the general volunteer culture.=C2=A0 Gentoo=
currently<br>
> > is an all-volunteer organization, and as such has a certain cultu=
re.<br>
> > If you look at FOSS organizations that tend to pay substantial am=
ounts<br>
> > of people you end up with professional management and so on.=C2=
=A0 That<br>
> > isn't necessarily a bad thing but it is a big change.<br>
> ><br>
> > It just is an issue that I don't think anybody wants to go ne=
ar.=C2=A0 If<br>
> > people want to donate to their favorite dev I doubt anybody would=
be<br>
> > bothered.=C2=A0 It just doesn't make sense to have the founda=
tion operate<br>
> > as a payment processor when you have lots of companies that offer=
<br>
> > exactly that service, or things like cryptocurrency if you want t=
o go<br>
> > that route.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Have a great day!<br>
><br>
> ~ Maciej XGQT Bar=C4=87<br>
><br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:xgqt@gentoo.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer norefe=
rrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">xgqt@gentoo.org</a><br>
> Gentoo Linux developer<br>
> (emacs, math, ml, scheme, sci)<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>
--00000000000061fa1505f4fbacad--