[Buildbot-devel] Offer of membership to Buildbot into Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc.

Dustin J. Mitchell dustin at v.igoro.us
Mon Mar 18 01:36:17 UTC 2013

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Dustin J. Mitchell <dustin at v.igoro.us> wrote:
>> The next step is to negotiate a formal agreement between the project and
>> the Conservancy, which is called a fiscal sponsorship agreement (FSA).
>> You can find a template of the agreement available on Conservancy's
>> website at: http://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/ConservancyFSATemplate.pdf
>>             http://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/conservancy-fsa-template.tex
> I'd like to give folks a few days to read and respond with their
> preferences here, and reasons for those preferences.  In particular,
> before I state my opinions, I'd like to hear thoughts on:

Speak up, folks!

The major question here is the form of leadership.  I don't think we
need to get too creative.  In fact, I think the first option - Simple
Self-Perpetuating Committee - is adequate.  I'd suggest beginning with
a three-person committee, although as written the committee can change
that number (upward) with a simple majority.  I'd be amenable to the
section option, avoiding employees of the same company, too.

As for initial signatories, I think the easiest way to generate that
is from the 'git shortlog'.  I'll take extra care to reach the members
of MAINTAINERS.txt directly, but I think an email to all of the other
committers, at their commit address, should be an adequate attempt to
reach those who have made significant contributions.

Tom and Bradley and I talked at PyCon, and sorted out a few finer
points in the FSA language:

 - Section 2(c) sounds pretty draconian at a first read, but isn't so
bad.  Basically, it means anything done with Buildbot's name on it has
to be done in Conservancy's name, and in accordance with the rules
they/we are bound to.  We outlined some obviously-OK stuff
(collaborating on a paper), some obviously-not stuff (doing business),
and stuff we should consult with Conservancy on before getting
ourselves in trouble.

 - The termination section is pretty complex, but basically boils down
to this: if Conservancy decides to terminate the relationship,
Buildbot's assets have to go to another 501(c)3.  We would have 60
days to find such another 501(c)3, and another 60 days after that if
Conservancy is OK with it.  As written, the assets would remain with
conservancy if all of that fails, but we're looking at some alternate
language that would transfer the assets elsewhere.


More information about the devel mailing list