Personally, I don't see any issue or problem w/ that. I would even go further: if someone on the D&I cmmt (or elsewhere in the ASF) wished to contact their employer directly and see if they would sponsor Outreachy (directly) to work on an ASF project (or projects) then again, I would not see any problem w/ that. How could I? Similar things have happened since Day 1.
Since we would not be the middle-man, so to speak, we would not be paying for development; nor would we need to figure out some 'loophole' or 'work-around' around that principle; nor would this effort in any way chip away at that principle nor create some precedent 'around' it. On 2019/06/19 19:32:32, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > I realize that this question might be viewed as a bit of a reset, but let's> > soften that by saying that it is a hypothetical reset.> > > > So ...> > > My question is whether the ASF would have a problem if Outreachy came to us> > and said "We have funding for 5 internships to work on Apache projects, can> > you help us select which interns and help interns find projects> > of interest?". This is basically the same as GSoC from the point of view of> > the ASF.> > > My theory is that the response would be about the same. "Sure". At the> > level of five interns, it is likely that the process would be a bit> > different (as in, it is likely that one or two people would have a> > high-touch approach to helping interns match up to projects).> > > The reason that I think that the answer would be yes is that there is a> > strong similarity to an existing arrangement and because no money comes> > from ASF to make this happen.> > > > Assuming that this is the response, my second question is whether we could> > make things> >
