Re: Conservancy as potential home for OPW (was Re: Mission Statement)

[Oliver Propst <oliver propst gmail com>]

Was interesting to hear about the Outreachy announcement at FOSDEM are
looking forward to learn the details.

On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn ebb org> wrote:
> [ I want to be clear that I'm here primarily as an individual member of
>   the GNOME Foundation.  However, this particular post is primarily on
>   behalf on Conservancy -- since Oliver called out Conservancy
>   explicitly as a possible home for OPW.  I'm the President, on the
>   Board of Directors, and an employee of Conservancy. ]
>
> Oliver Propst wrote at 05:58 (EDT):
> > I know an organization [1] that have administrative and legal
> > expertise, maybe they would be interested in govern the program?
> >
> > 1 https://sfconservancy.org/overview/
>
> Conservancy would of course welcome an application by OPW to join
> Conservancy, and Oliver is correct that Conservancy's primary daily
> activities are handling the types of administrative tasks that GF has
> struggled to handle for OPW.
>
> OPW is somewhat different from our usual member project, which are
> primarily Free Software projects themselves.  However, Conservancy has
> established in the past some projects that are primarily services to
> advance and/or protect the adoption of Free Software.  Thus, an OPW
> application to Conservancy is not unprecedented.  Conservancy's
> evaluation committee would need to consider OPW as an applicant to
> Conservancy and decide.  (Conservancy's eval committee meets monthly.)
>
> However, one useful component of any application from a project with an
> existing affiliation to a Free Software 501(c)(3) non-profit is a
> definitive statement from the governing body of that non-profit (in this
> case, likely, from GF's Board) which indicates the existing org has no
> objection to the application.  Particularly in this case, Conservancy
> has an excellent relationship with GF; thus, Conservancy would certainly
> seek a joint decision for a relocation of OPW to Conservancy.
>
> If this change is really something GF wants to pursue and Conservancy
> can make an impact here helping OPW flourish, I'm prepared personally to
> prioritize such a transition to make sure it's smooth and easy.
>
> Máirín Duffy wrote at 12:55 (EDT) on Wednesday:
> > > Red Hat and the Software Freedom Conservancy are funding Marina and
> > > Karen's time spent on administering it respectively
>
> Regardless of anything that happens about the issue raised above,
> Conservancy remains very supportive of OPW.  Conservancy's employment
> policy in fact allows use of some resources to do some volunteer work
> for other charities.  I use that to do volunteer work for the FSF
> myself, and Karen has done so to help OPW and GF, so I don't expect
> Karen will cease involvement with OPW in any event.  (IIUC, Karen also
> volunteers further on nights/weekends for OPW and GF as well.)
>
> Finally, I personally remain very supportive of OPW.  I've been urging
> existing Conservancy member projects for years to participate more in
> OPW.  Sadly, I haven't been as successful as I'd like, but both Karen
> and I actively have been working on that since she came to work at
> Conservancy, and hopefully we'll see more Conservancy member projects
> sponsoring OPW slots in the future!
> --
> Bradley M. Kuhn
> President & Distinguished Technologist of Software Freedom Conservancy
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list



-- 
-mvh Oliver Propst