incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Affiliation vs. individual
Date Sat, 04 Nov 2017 21:03:12 GMT
On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 3:13 PM Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi Gunnar,
>
> I think that you present a reasonable scenario. We even allow individuals
> to use an alias for their public names. We do want to know the real names
> on the ICLA.
>
> Rather than “private donation” I think “unaffiliated” or “” is better.
>
> As you understand we want to know affiliation as a measure of diversity
> for practical reasons. We are about Community over Code and want to avoid
> being in a situation where a project is unviable because a majority of the
> individuals were contributing through work and their employers made other
> decisions. This happens all the time and is perfectly normal and expected.
>

I agree with everything Dave's listed in here.  In cases like what you're
describing Gunnar, "unaffiliated" is a perfectly acceptable response to the
question about the affiliations of the proposed PMC.


>
> In the Incubator we want to assure that podlings are viable communities
> when they graduate. In that assessment in my opinion unaffiliated
> committers and PMC members are truly a plus for a community. Assuming that
> they can answer asking why a committer was affiliated at the beginning of
> incubation and is no longer may prove the diversity of the podling. Changes
> in affiliation might be good signs too.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> > On Nov 4, 2017, at 11:06 AM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gunnar@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've discussed this with a few individuals but would like to raise the
> > discussion with a larger group.
> >
> > Situation
> >
> > As contributors to the ASF, we represents ourselves as individuals. Some
> of
> > us contribute to projects as part of our employment, some of us donate
> our
> > time privately.
> >
> > Discussion
> >
> > You the individual is asked to share your employer when going through
> > processes such as graduation. I get the reason: to ensure diversity in
> the
> > project.
> >
> > However, some of us are donating our private time and may therefore want
> to
> > represent ourselves as a private donor rather than involve our employeer
> in
> > the discussion.
> >
> > [Disclosure: I work for a company that is unlikely to have an issue with
> my
> > involvement with ASF projects outside what my company cares for.]
> >
> > Proposal
> >
> > Anyone that chooses to do so can use "private donation" instead of the
> > employer when representing affiliation.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>
>

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