I concur entirely with Dan (thanks for reviving this discussion Dan), and would 
love to see the community celebrating the creation of just such a Foundation at 
the conference in Grand Rapids. Perhaps that's being unrealistic, but sooner is 
better, IMHO. I suppose Foundation establishment should precede 
celebration...perhaps an exploratory work group could be nominated by the 
community?

Ben Hyman
Manager, Library Policy & Technology
Public Library Services Branch, Ministry of Education, BC
Phone 250.387.4043 or Toll Free 800.663.7051
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
www.bced.gov.bc.ca/pls/ <http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/pls/> 

From: Dan Scott <[email protected]>

Date: Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen foundation (again)

To: Evergreen Discussion Group <[email protected]>

There was a brief discussion shortly after the Evergreen Conference about the 
possibility of setting up an Evergreen Software Foundation [1] and most 
recently a proposal to set up a joint Koha + Evergreen foundation (which is 
probably a function better served by something like http://www.code4lib.org/ 
<http://www.code4lib.org/>  in any case).

I posted a response to George's blog post [2] about the difficulties that the 
Koha community has undergone recently and their renewed effort to establish a 
foundation, but in that context I would like to revive the discussion about an 
Evergreen Software Foundation by suggesting that if such an entity is formed, 
it should roughly have the following responsibilities:

* Hold the trademarks, logos, and evergreen-ils.org/open-ils.org related 
collateral in trust for the use of the community

* Extend the community's development capacity (for example, by funding the 
creation of developer training tutorials and workshops, where development 
should be defined broadly to include documentation, usability, design, testing, 
etc)

* Coordinate joint funding for the development of new features

* Organize the Evergreen International Conferences

Further, I suggest that we would be foolish to turn down the Software Freedom 
Conservancy's [3] offer to serve, for free, as the 501(c)(3) [4] shell 
organization that would be able to hold the collateral and financial assets in 
trust for the foundation, and would accept donations to the foundation and 
maintain corporate records and file the tax return (again, for free). It has 
been stated several times that "it's not that hard to file the paperwork for a 
501(c)(3)", but I would argue that an advantage of the Software Freedom 
Conservancy is that it is a neutral entity.

[1]. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.education.libraries.open-ils.general/1258 
<http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.education.libraries.open-ils.general/1258> 

[2]. http://www.parser.ca/z678/2009/09/16/koha-manoeuvres/ 
<http://www.parser.ca/z678/2009/09/16/koha-manoeuvres/> 

[3]. http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/ 
<http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/>  - "As a fiscal sponsor for FOSS 
projects, the Conservancy provides member projects with free financial and 
administrative services, but does not involve itself with technological and 
artistic decisions."

[4]. As a Canadian, I don't care about 501(c)(3) status because I get no tax 
advantages from it.

Reply via email to