I'm on my mobile and not able to conduct a full search of the project site but...
It is a fact that the ASF does not pay for code, by design. Nobody here has the right to ignore that. Challenge it, through the membership, sure. But do not ignore it. The board has already, on behalf of the membership, asserted thay any proposal from D&I must address the concern that paying for Outreachy interns may count as paying for code. Arguing that it doesn't do so will not convince the board. Presenting a proposal that addresses the concern is the only action that will yield results. Other than that the only path is to go to the membership and ask for this 20+ year old policy to be changed - I don't recommend that. We've been down this road three times that I've been involved with: GSoC - here we resolved it by having Google pay the students and requiring the mentor stipend be donated to the foundation Travel Assistance Committee (general fund) - here we paid for travel and expenses for attendance at events. No code was expected. Applicants were not chosen based on their general profile rather than activity in projects. Travel Assistance Committee (directed fund for a minority group) - as above with some provisions to ensure nobody outside the minority group lost a spot because of the addition of minority group applicants I would encourage the committee to focus on building a proposal that fits within the expectations of the board, who act as they believe the membership expect. Arguing, about the validity of a long held policy, which itself does not discriminate, is a waste of time that could be better spent on mentoring individuals. Rosa Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: Sage Sharp <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 3:02:38 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Outreachy framework proposal On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:48 PM Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2019/06/26 20:55:52, Naomi S <[email protected]> wrote: > > if you can’t justify that rule beyond “that’s how we do it”, it’s a > useless> > > rule and should be abandoned. if you can’t find a reason beyond “we > should> > > be neutral”, that’s the end of the productive discussion as far as I’m> > > concerned lol> > > > > It has been justified numerous times by several people. It has been a > guiding principle for decades. Now you are free to ignore all that, or > disregard that (you can't teach people who refuse to learn), but pretending > that the only justification that has ever been made for it is "that’s how > we do it" is just plain silly and disingenuous and so obviously false that > I am somewhat embarrassed to even respond to it. I'm new to ASF culture and norms. Can you please point me to a public document that outlines why the ASF does not pay for software development? Sage Sharp Outreachy Organizer
