On 6/27/2019 9:09 AM, Naomi S wrote: > the justification for not paying for code has been given in terms of the > ASF maintaining neutrality. I have not, to date, seen a single > justification for this principle that didn't boil down to wanting to remain > neutral
OK, and why is that insufficient reason for you to accept it as a core tenet of the ASF? This tenet is a core differentiator for the ASF from other organizations that do pay for code from day 1 with the original founders. Like the US 1st Constitutional Amendment, it just states what cannot occur: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The why is ensconced in the history of the nation. Perhaps we need a document like the bill of rights that says the definition of code and that the ASF doesn't pay for it? Or is that, like the Apache Way not really being explicitly defined, too set in stone? In any case, this isn't being anti-outreachy. I full support asking Sponsors to fund Outreachy earmarked to us as a gray-area work around for this specific issue. Like they-who-shall-not-be-named did, let's find another sponsor for the $10.5k in the same manner. Regards, KAM -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
