thank you Gris!! On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 14:07, Griselda Cuevas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone - It seems we have consensus to ask for budget we can dedicate > to Outreachy interns regardless of the specifics on the execution. I'll go > ahead and leave the item in the budget request for $30k. > > > I'm going to focus now on sending the budget request, after that I'd like > to come back to find a champion (or champions) and hone a plan to achieve > this. > > > Thank you all. > > G > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 10:49, Joan Touzet <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello everyone, I'm in transit and I'm officially out until Monday, but >> wanted to respect Gris's request for feedback by the end of today. >> >> (FYI: My email is being authored offline, and I have no emails newer >> than ~06-12 18:00 EDT. I'm sending to dev@, and have set Reply-To to >> dev@, because it's important we discuss this as much as possible in >> public.) >> >> CC'ing Greg Stein and David Nalley for Infra questions. >> >> >> # Summary >> >> * I support the initiative overall. >> * I support the Outreachy budget item (Option 1) as seed money, but >> * I think external funding for interns should be the goal (Option 2). >> * Pick the right *tech focused*, externally useful project. I propose >> PonyMail. >> * This budget line-item should be extended to cover any paid Infra >> staff's mentoring effort (see below for details, estimate 5h/week) >> because Infra won't have budgeted for this additional load we'd be >> asking of them. >> * My other ASF responsibilities mean I probably cannot be Outreachy's >> main champion for FY2020, sorry, but happy to help as much as I can. >> * Sorry for the length of this email. I tried hard to make it shorter >> :( >> >> >> # On Outreachy >> >> As I understand it, Outreachy's focus is getting individuals in >> under-represented groups who are economically unable to sustain >> themselves both the funding and the support they need so they can >> successfully volunteer their time in open source development, with a >> core focus on *coding*. >> >> One of Outreachy's most notable achievements, which took many years to >> achieve, was working out how to help get inexperienced devs successful >> in contributing to the Linux kernel. They're really successful in this! >> They built a lot of supports around that process that thankfully the ASF >> shouldn't need - in fact, they require applicants to prove their >> suitability through a kind of gauntlet - but this is the type of "big >> profile" engagement that we should be aiming for when we propose to them. >> >> Remember: just because we want to work with Outreachy doesn't mean >> they'll agree to work with us, if it doesn't look like a good fit. We >> get interviewed, too. :) >> >> >> # So what project or projects make sense? >> >> I also like Niall's suggestion of 2x interns in FY2020, one in each of >> the two cohorts. >> >> We need a crisp, technical-first opportunity. Since D&I hasn't started >> to liaise with ASF Project PMCs yet (beyond those represented these >> lists), I agree the first FY20 cohort (August 2019) would be a trial >> run, using a central ASF-wide project. D&I has a clearer mandate here, >> and it'll be easier to liaise with central groups. That leaves us >> sufficient time to get 1 or more non-central projects engaged for the >> Late January 2020 cohort. >> >> We have a lot of "cobbler's children have no shoes" projects at the ASF, >> and I'd love more bodies on them (especially anything that makes PMC's >> lives easier when interfacing with Infra, the Board, or [email protected]), >> but Outreachy is about putting the needs of the *intern* first, *not* >> our needs. They'd probably reject work on Whimsy on these grounds, in my >> opinion. >> >> We need to consider that this individual likely won't be an ASF >> contributor or committer yet, either, so a project that has strong value >> outside the ASF as well would be best. >> >> Also, while there is room for documentation projects, website redesigns, >> training materials and so on, I'd argue that these aren't the best >> opportunities for an Outreachy intern. All too often it's precisely this >> "work no one else wants to do" that falls to under-represented >> individuals. It'll look especially bad if our first attempt at a >> diversity initiative comes off as throwing undesirable work "over the >> wall" to a minority intern. (It'd be even worse if it also looked like >> we were asking them to do diversity-focused work...no one's proposed >> this, just saying.) >> >> Things that touch the most people possible, AND have external-to-Apache >> users would be the best opportunities. I think PonyMail might be the >> best central project here. Can anyone think of others? >> >> >> # On Mentoring >> >> Reminder: if we're picking a project primarily supported and run by >> Infra staff like PonyMail, many of these are ASF-paid people. Their >> hours are already allocated and tracked by Infra management for the huge >> number of things we ask of them. (Read as: they're already overworked >> and underpaid.) >> >> Assuming at least the first intern would be working on e.g. PonyMail, >> let's budget for an additional 5h/week for Infra staff to cover the >> expected mentoring duties. This shows respect to Infra for their time >> and effort, even if this just ends up looking on the books like >> Department A paying Department B. >> >> This whole proposal is still contingent on Infra agreeing to work >> together on this. No one wants to be "volun-told." That, too, would look >> really bad (on D&I, not the ASF at large). >> >> So, Greg/David (on CC): How does this sound to you? If positive (even if >> PonyMail isn't exactly the right project), is this 5h/week a number you >> can help Gris calculate to include in the line item? Remember, we don't >> have to spend the money if it doesn't work out. >> >> >> # On the ASF funding question >> >> No matter how clearly we state that Outreachy grants allow someone to >> contribute voluntarily when they do not otherwise have the economic >> means to do so, there will be a vocal group who will see this as "money >> for code," and who won't easily be convinced of the subtlety here - even >> if we're legally in the right. I agree that would be a bad precedent to >> set, and might even endanger our non-profit status. >> >> (I also don't know if there is precedent of the ASF giving money to >> another US-registered non-profit as a social or charitable initiative - >> anyone know?) >> >> This is why I prefer Option 2 for the intern funding piece (Infra staff >> mentoring time notwithstanding). If we go with Option 1 - which I also >> support - I expect we'll need to be very, very explicit that this is >> seed money for a trial run only, and that, if successful, future year >> D&I/Outreachy intern funding would only come via coordination with >> Fundraising. It would also give us a year to experiment and come up with >> the right process to make it easy for our 300+ projects to engage with a >> sponsor, Outreachy, D&I, and Fundraising for success. >> >> One footnote: if the central efforts with Infra work out well, I could >> see future years continuing to fund Outreachy interns at the >> Foundation-level. I would hope that D&I would work with the Board and >> other Committees to ensure the right initiatives are chosen. >> >> >> -Joan >> >> >> >> On 2019-06-12 2:16 p.m., Griselda Cuevas wrote: >> > I like Niall's idea of trying out with 2 interns. The website states >> that >> > the cost is $5,500 per intern and $500 for travel. >> > >> > Outreachy's website [1] has a good description of the format, program >> etc. >> > >> > I don't have details in what the interns will do, my guess is that they >> > will work on similar tasks than the GSoC folks? Maybe folks who have >> done >> > the program can share more info? >> > >> > A champion would be the project owner, who ensures we execute on the >> budget >> > request and program. >> > >> > [1] Outreachy.org >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 2:57 PM Niall Pemberton < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 10:51, Bertrand Delacretaz < >> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 11:21 AM Griselda Cuevas <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>> ...Please vote on wether you support Outreachy as a project this year >> >>> and what option you'd prefer we follow re:budget request... >> >>> >> >>> Considering the lack of time, best might be to ask for the $30k budget >> >>> with the understanding that we're not sure yet if we'll use it. >> >> >> >> >> >> There are two rounds of internship each year. The next “Pre >> Application” >> >> period is late August 2019. Will we be ready with a co-ordinator, >> projects >> >> willing to take part & mentors by then? If not the next period starts >> in >> >> Late January 2020. The minimum commitment required is funding for one >> >> intern @ $6,500 and it could well work out that Outreachy will be able >> to >> >> connect interns with Sponsors for funding. There’s still the question >> of >> >> how we will setup long term with Sponsors so that the ASF isn’t paying >> for >> >> interns. I would suggest that this year is seen as a trial run and >> just ask >> >> for $13,000 for 2 interns (one in each period) with the understanding >> that >> >> this is just seed money to allow us to participate and may not be >> spent if >> >> Outreachy can hook up Sponsors. We’ll learn lessons this year and if a >> >> solution can be found for funnelling sponsors direct to Outreachy then >> >> hopefully it will be self funding pretty quickly. >> >> >> >> Niall >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> This would give us time to better define the project and needs. >> >>> >> >>> -Bertrand >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >
