On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 4:18 AM Vincent de Lau <vinc...@delau.nl> wrote:
> On Monday, June 16, 2025 at 7:59:31 PM UTC+2 Korvin Szanto wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 4:43 AM Vincent de Lau <vin...@delau.nl> wrote: > > > I'm a bit surprised that repaying out-of-pocket expenses would not be > allowed already. It might be a bit of a too strict interpretation of the > current bylaws. > > The bylaw is currently quite clear in my mind: > - PHP-FIG SHALL NOT pay individual contributors to PHP-FIG standards or > other personnel, like Core Committee members, Secretaries, Project > Representatives or working groups. > > and I don't think it's wise to start loosely interpreting things when it > comes to money, it's easy enough to amend the bylaw to handle the case > clearly. > > > Apparently, this needs clarification and I agree that we should be > cautious. In my interpretation, reimbursing someone for payments they did > on behalf of the FIG is not the same as paying someone. The money is not > intended for the individual, the money is ultimately spend directly to the > benefit of the FIG. I would support a bylaw change that makes that explicit. > > I would also support an additional change or decision to retroactively > reimburse expenses made on behalf of the FIG since the last funding bylaw > change. These expenses have been approved by the CC, but for whatever > reason we still relied on the personal wallets of our secretaries. > I believe the change allows for this as it sits. I'd potentially accept a suggestion that adds clarification if you think it's needed. > > > > > 3. Grants the ability for Secretaries to create and maintain a > > print-on-demand swag shop if they so choose to allow individuals to > > contribute while spreading the PHP-FIG mission in their communities. I > > would definitely be in the market for PHP-FIG swag > > This is an interesting idea. I don't know how successful it would be, or > what we'd use any such revenue for, but I'm open to discussing it. However, > this is a much larger question than just cleaning up the Tidelift situation > so it should be kept to a separate discussion and separate vote. > > > > I'm wondering if the effort is worth the hassle. > > This merch store is not a mandate as written, it's up to the Secretaries > to decide if it's worth the hassle for them given that they'd be the ones > on the hook to do the work. > > > Instead of doing this ourselves, maybe we should allow the promoting > others who raise funds for PHP-FIG. For instance, we could point people to > Andreas' store and have him donate the money via OpenCollective. > > Allowing others to use and sell our logo in swag introduces conflicts of > interest, licensing, and oversight issues that I'd prefer we avoid. > > > Fair enough. I would only guard that selling swag is considered the only > way to solve this funding issue, while there might be simpler solutions > that require lower effort. > I hear your argument that, in this proposed change, gathering opencollective funding is contingent on this idea that we could sell swag, but I would point out that the bar is not "selling swag", we'd simply be _granting permission_ for the secretaries to sell swag if they ever choose to do so in the future. They may never sell swag, or perhaps setting up a swag shop could be something that a potential secretary runs on in the future. > > The biggest challenge at the moment, IMHO, is not having a way to > receive funds. I think that opening up the OpenCollective page for > donations will help solve our direct financial needs quickly. I believe > there are enough people here on the list that would gladly donate a couple > of dollar. For instance, I would consider changing my standing donation to > the PHP Foundation over to the FIG, knowing that any excess would end up > there anyway. > > Like I mentioned above, we can't expedite this process fast enough to get > ahead of the expenses since they were due last week to my knowledge. Given > that we'll certainly reach our funding goal immediately once we open it up, > and that we haven't been able to accept money at all up until this point, > I'd prefer not expediting the process without a clear reason to do so. > > > I agree this should not be rushed, but we should also strike the iron > while its hot. These kind of discussions have a tendency to fade out of > everyone's attention, only to be rekindled too late for the next cycle. > By this logic, stripping things out of this change would cause those things to fade out of everyone's attention. I would offer the best way to strike while hot would be to discuss the substance of the change, or call a vote if there's nothing more to discuss. Regards, > Vincent > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/99a28557-3b24-443b-9d37-c992c02e99b3n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/99a28557-3b24-443b-9d37-c992c02e99b3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > Thanks, Korvin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CANeXGWVKqJJbsAVHKiSzf%2BpROqZ%3DjNKiiiUPKwKwB1JTFC32rg%40mail.gmail.com.
