Not that I have any problems with our benevolent overlords, and not that I would likely achieve franchise with a scant 2 patches under my belt, but I can't help wondering how such a revolt would succeed seeing as the only method to achieve franchise-hood is controlled by the same people one would be revolting against.
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Jeremy White <jwh...@codeweavers.com> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I try to send out a periodic message to the wine-devel mailing list > outlining the 'corporate' structure of Wine and how some decisions are made. > > We work with the Software Freedom Conservancy. They manage the pieces > of Wine that benefit from a formal organization, such as managing money, > holding Trademarks, and so on. > > The primary activity we have conducted with them over the past several > years is managing money - about $3,000 each year. They manage all funds > donated to Wine - the donate button goes into a bank account they manage > and any larger private donations go there as well. > > For decisions on how to spend funds, we've adopted a loose set of > guidelines. That is, we have a decision group and we require a majority > of members to approve any spending. Alexandre and I are the current > members of that group. We also claim the right to appoint anyone else > to replace or augment the decision group. > > We CC all decisions to an auditor. We have recently asked Michael > Stefanuic to replace Zachary Goldberg in that role. A critical > requirement, we feel, is that a non CodeWeavers staff member be fully > aware of all decisions made. > > We choose this strategy rather than a fully public process so that we > can apply discretion and protect privacy of people that ask for help > with travel funding. > > The SFC will recognize a 'revolt' by the Wine project. That is, the > designated decision group can be overthrown, once you figure out our > evil plans, if the SFC is persuaded that the majority of Wine > contributors agree on that point. Patch count in the Wine tree will be > the primary mechanism to recognize a contributor. > > Finally, all spending by the SFC on Wine's behalf for the last few years > has been related to Wineconf. That has primarily been to help > defray travel costs for Wine contributors to come to Wineconf. > > Wine's income has been around $3,000 / year for the past few years; we > tend to spend down much of the balance each year for Wineconf. > > Cheers, > > Jeremy > > p.s. One note - the SFC also manages the GSOC payments, although I > believe that they ostensibly manage that on behalf of Google, not really > Wine. That is generally coordinated by Wine's GSOC coordinator, and > Alexandre and I have nothing to do with it. > > >