Trustees, Council members, As discussed on #gentoo-trustees, I would like to represent Gentoo in filing the initial application to Software Freedom Conservancy [1]. This is the umbrella that Robin has considered most appropriate for us. Few notes: 1. I am only asking to be the one dedicated person to send the application on behalf of Gentoo, and be the point of contact for the initial discussion. I am not going to make any final decisions myself, and the final means of managing Gentoo-SFC relationship is to established in the process. In other words, I'm offering to do the work, not take the power. 2. The application is non-binding. The point is that it takes time to be processed (presumably counted in months), so it is better to start early and get some real information for further discussion. We can decide not to accept SFC at any point. 3. All this considered, if someone has actually been contacting SFC, please tell me. I'm going to create a dedicated alias for the purpose and CC it on all communications. [1] https://sfconservancy.org/
mgorny: re point 3: I have previously been in direct touch with SFC because we use the same book-keeping solution as them, and have discussed applying to them. I have NOT been in touch since we finished cleaning up our taxes.
Further, I'm thinking that Neddy has a good point that we should have a COMMON initial application query that we can send to multiple umbrellas.
Email as sent by mgorny to SFC on 2020/08/11: === Hello, I have been appointed to officially represent Gentoo Linux. We would like to apply to join Conservancy as a member project. To the best of my knowledge, Robin H. Johnson (robbat2) has been already discussing this with bkuhn unofficially -- I would like to make an official application. Website: https://gentoo.org/ Our project develops Gentoo Linux, a source-based Linux distribution that can be optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Thanks to a unique package format (ebuild), Gentoo combines easy building and installation of packages, ability to support competing projects (and let users choose between them), and easy customization or use of your own ebuilds. The technical aspects of the distribution are governed by a 7-member Council [1] that is elected yearly by the developers. The Council reaches its decisions by a majority vote. The legal and financial aspects are currently handled by the Gentoo Foundation (GF), with a 5-member Trustee board [2] elected by the Foundation members. If accepted, we would like to transfer our assets from GF into SFC and eventually dissolve GF. Thanks in advance for your reply. [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council [2] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Main_Page ===
Created attachment 654188 [details] Initial application mail Here's the initial application mail as reviewed by Trustees and sent to SFC. Modulo the SFC-specific parts, it can be reused for other potential umbrellas.
The work product should be a single document that we can use as an initial application to any umbrella that we care to approach. This is a two way thing, rather like a job interview. We are determining if potential umbrellas are suitable for us and potential umbrellas will determine if we are suitable for them. By all means aim the work at the SFC but if we know of other requirements from other potential umbrellas, that should be covered. Its an initial approach, not a formal application. That will come later if we get any responses along the lines of "maybe but ..." The formal application can be a development of the initial application.
My understanding from our brief correspondence with Bradley M Kuhn is that the SFC was "highly unlikely" (his words) to accept Gentoo at this time and Bradley recommended we do one or more of: - Spin down and start another org. - Apply to SPI. - Apply to OpenCollective. In particular, in addition to the Gentoo Foundation's lack of 501 standing (e.g. we are not tax exempt) Bradley found it difficult to take on the liability of an entire software distribution, as opposed to a single software project. Note this is not a "no" (we are still free to apply to SFC) but it was a straightforward message of low probability of acceptance. -A
(In reply to Alec Warner from comment #6) > My understanding from our brief correspondence with Bradley M Kuhn is that > the SFC was "highly unlikely" (his words) to accept Gentoo at this time and > Bradley recommended we do one or more of: >[...] > Note this is not a "no" (we are still free to apply to SFC) but it was a > straightforward message of low probability of acceptance. > Given this, the council (in CC) has asked whether we should close this bug, given we're not likely to pursue this avenue. We should update the wiki accordingly too.
(In reply to Alec Warner from comment #6) > My understanding from our brief correspondence with Bradley M Kuhn is that > the SFC was "highly unlikely" (his words) to accept Gentoo at this time and > Bradley recommended we do one or more of: >[...] > Note this is not a "no" (we are still free to apply to SFC) but it was a > straightforward message of low probability of acceptance. > Given this, the council (in CC) asks Trustees to close this bug, given we're not likely to pursue this avenue. We should update the wiki accordingly too. If you feel that's not appropriate, please let us know.
(In reply to Sam James from comment #8) > (In reply to Alec Warner from comment #6) > > My understanding from our brief correspondence with Bradley M Kuhn is that > > the SFC was "highly unlikely" (his words) to accept Gentoo at this time and > > Bradley recommended we do one or more of: > >[...] > > Note this is not a "no" (we are still free to apply to SFC) but it was a > > straightforward message of low probability of acceptance. > > > > Given this, the council (in CC) asks Trustees to close this bug, given we're > not likely to pursue this avenue. We should update the wiki > accordingly too. > > If you feel that's not appropriate, please let us know. Any update post-trustees election?
UnCC-ing council@ per the discussion at the meeting.
