Re: SFC, GNOME Foundation (WAS Re: Meeting Minutes Published - February 1st, 2011)

[Paul Cutler <pcutler gnome org>]

Hi all,

Thanks for the feedback and I apologize for not responding sooner.

We are currently looking into possible solutions - personally, I agree
with Dave and Stormy's comments that GNOME should offer these
services.  We are looking into what the legal liability protection
requirements are.

Bradley has been great in sharing information of the services the SFC
provides and how much work goes into them.  In evaluating handling
money for projects within GNOME, one concern is the number of projects
that might be interested in doing this as the accounting work is time
intensive.  Stormy said above:

"The money issue is probably a tracking issue more than anything else.
We could mange that by limiting the number of projects. We could put
criteria around what it means to be a project to ensure that it's a
long lasting and well managed entity before we agreed to handle its
finances. I know the SFC has a process for that."

That part is a bit tricky as we want to be fair to all projects and,
if we go in this direction, we need to make sure we have criteria in
place to manage that.

Paul


On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:57 PM,  <vasile softwarefreedom org> wrote:
> Bradley Kuhn can probably speak to this better than I can, but I want to
> note that to do the Conservancy right is a lot of work, depending on how
> active your member projects are.  If GNOME decides to go down this path,
> I highly recommend you take Bradley out to dinner (he can be bribed with
> burritos) and get a feel for the scope of this endeavor.
>
> For another look at how this can be approached, you might also talk to
> Software in the Public Interest.
>
> I don't think either SFC or SPI will be stingy with information.
>
> Best Regards,
> James
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
>