-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Trevor Harmon wrote: > On Mar 18, 2006, at 8:09 AM, David H. wrote: > <snip> > I'm not sure why this is necessary. Fink is growing, but that doesn't > mean it requires a corporate foundation. There are only two reasons > given on the wiki: > Thank you for your message Trevor. I have already seen that Benjamin addressed some of your concerns, let me please add some comments myself. I value your input. So thank you for taking the time. First of all,. there are only two reasons because this is a work in progress and you are all invited to add your own ideas. That means that you should be free to express what you, as a community, would like to see the money spent on.
> "Putting Fink under a legal umbrella thus partly indemnifying the core > developers from most legal threats, as well as protecting them from > costly claims for compensation." > > Again, I don't see why this is necessary. Fink, as well as all submitted > packages, are licensed under the GPL, which explicitly states there is > no warranty. And although that doesn't prevent someone from suing Fink's > developers, the chances of that happening are pretty slim, are they not? > I've developed and distributed several products under the GPL, but I > certainly don't lie awake at night wondering if someone's going to sue me. > The things you mention are one area where I would agree with you. However, there are other things tied into this, which are far better handled by a cooperation. For example the Fink Logo has to be owned by "someone". The individual ideas and ideas that are in the Fink package manager might be something we wish to protect in the future. The name "Fink" might be protected in the future and other things that are simply better handled by a body that does not belong to a single individual. As we believe that Fink belongs to the community we would like the things that "belong to Fink" also belong to a "legal" community. The Board of directors is such a community in my humble opinion. > "A legally protected way to accept monetary donations as well as > donations in kind, ensuring the resources needed to improve and further > all services provided to the community by Fink." > > Nothing is said about why money is necessary and what it will be used > for. Please see my comments above. The same applies here as well. > New computers for a build farm? Yes, most likely. That is an issue we have had to deal with for a long time and such a build farm would be appreciated, surely by the community as well. > Salaries for the core developers? This might be a long term goal. This is not limited to core developers though. Right now the lack of dedicated maintainers and developers is an issue for Fink and having the power to pay someone to do such work would be a great service to all. > Even if there's a good reason, would donations even come? So far I have had three individuals offering their money already in private mails. That is something I find very pleasing and I thanked and will thank each of them as soon as I have the time. As this is our first "test" to involve the community, I did not expect such positive feedback. Therefore, yes there will definitely be donations. > I suspect most > in the Fink community would rather provide time than money. In > particular, I'd rather we focus on structural and policy problems [1] > that are never going to be solved by throwing money at them. I do not quite see the connection. The policy has been understood and followed by many. This might be unfortunate, but it is not something I feel we most fret over. > And even > then, let's say we all agree that Fink needs money and everyone has > money to donate. Is a corporation really the best way of handling this? > Don't SourceForge or PayPal provide a donation service without all the > extra overhead (the expense of hiring a lawyer and all that)? > No one said, that we would not be using PayPal to accept initial donations. The wiki even displays the compliance statement we filed with them. However, when it comes to monetary issue, I do believe that we should have full control over the process, something sourceforge does not guarantee us. I hope this explains some of the ideas behind our steps toward FDN. Please feel free to add your ideas/concerns to the wiki and thank you for answering. - -d -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEHdofPMoaMn4kKR4RAvVmAJsEzJUnmO5e8foaI2BLrapWUPEjHwCfWh8B xuPT5DjpZOZnO9QZMBbYvBU= =vIMd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
