incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jake Farrell <jfarr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Whimsy PMC
Date Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:37:56 GMT
I have always been an infra volunteer

-Jake

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> I’ll note that the only person I see from infra that has been proposed
> in the current PMC is Jake Ferrel:
>
> * Acquia: Jake Farrell
>
> Someone also correct me in that I don’t think Jake is a paid infra
> contractor.
>
> In addition the way I see this is that it is no different e.g.,
>
> than contributing upstream to FreeBSD or whatever - Infra contractors
> may fix something and decide it’s in the ASF’s best interests to
> contribute it upstream - same may happen for Whimsy. But to date,
> ASF infra folk that are contractors I believe are not proposed to
> be directly paid to contribute to Whimsy. Should they do so, great.
> But in the famous words of Sam Ruby let’s deal with this if there
> is an actual data point instead of hypotheticals.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
> Date: Monday, April 27, 2015 at 7:05 PM
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Whimsy PMC
>
> >On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
> >Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It's a tough one. We could be setting a precedence here that we
> >>absolutely
> >> do not want to set. On the other hand, it's problematic (not to mention
> >> simply ridiculous) if the foundation not being able to use Apache
> >>software
> >> because we don't pay for development and might want to submit a patch
> >> upstream.
> >>
> >> As long as all committers are equal and earn their merit in the
> >> traditional way I don't see a problem from the projects side. IN this
> >> instance the ASF is just another contributor to the project.
> >>
> >> This means "the foundation never pays for development" to something like
> >> "the foundation never pays for development except where the
> >>modification is
> >> made as part of our normal infrastructure operations. On these rare
> >> occasions the foundation is just another employer and the contributor is
> >> just another community member. Changes are contributed upstream through
> >>the
> >> normal contribution process. There is no special role for ASF infra
> >> contractors."
> >>
> >
> >The ASF pays for Infra contractors. Their job/role is to maintain our
> >systems. Sometimes their duty *may* be to contribute software to $Project
> >(wherever that may be).
> >
> >That is *very* distinct from paying a person to contribute directly to
> >$ASFProject.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >-g
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message