On 6/27/2019 9:35 AM, Naomi S wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 15:26, Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > 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. > > > can you point me to where I have indicated that I don't accept > neutrality as a core tenet? > > I accept that neutrality is important. and I welcome conversations > about what sort of neutrality we care about, and how we implement that > neutrality. for example, see Myrle's previous email (from this very > thread): > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d2ef5bfa16e15806130266669d30f8bbcf9282feec754f9bc5c5114f@%3Cdev.diversity.apache.org%3E > The core tenet I am referring to is not paying for code. I've heard it for 15 years. It's based on a concern it threatens another core tenet with vendor neutrality. So yes, not paying for code and being vendor neutral are well espoused tenets of the ASF.
You appear to be challenging that not paying for code is an invalid tenet because no one has explained why to you sufficiently. If you asked me why do we have a 1st amendment in the US, I would tell you to study history and trust the founders. The answer is the same for the ASF and that history will show you that the founders thought it was very important to be neutral as a differentiator from other organizations and that accepting payment for code would be a slippery slope eroding that neutrality. Regards, KAM -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
