Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: message received from 54.76.25.247 which
 is an MX secondary for general@incubator.apache.org)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <BY2PR03MB4900752F1E8AFB9EF6FD7A199E80@BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <55393E13.7000305@intertwingly.net>
	<CAKprHVbNBVkbUppz7LexW_ibiE4kgjvHjZsmER2G=xcs8_bhdg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1430160341.2853000.259262577.07230F16@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<553EC25B.2020005@rcbowen.com>
	<CAFG6u8GUg6udH3LLdDQBUbAfYYBY9KkYjtYSZFGJGYJo9PgV6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BY2PR03MB4900752F1E8AFB9EF6FD7A199E80@BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 21:05:23 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CABD8fLWoQLhepBZ+qeAQsJtA7iCf+p3jP4h=Q6N-7F0Gpvf9kw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Whimsy PMC
From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bae4286a4af610514bf4bf0

--047d7bae4286a4af610514bf4bf0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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

--047d7bae4286a4af610514bf4bf0--