[DISCUSS] Proposal of guidelines for individuals <> businesses Apache Way compliant relationships

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Hello everyone,

I would like to start a discussion on something I've been thinking and
discussing with a number of people offline, before I brought it here
for wider discussion.

I want to (eventually) propose to the board of the ASF to publish
(formally among other ASF guidelines) a document that would make it
clearer to both businesses and individuals what kind of business
relations are "good" and "comply" with the Apache Way.

The document is short, and follows - I think - the spirit of other
guidelines and policies that the ASF publishes - in terms of being
succinct, helpful and informative, but presenting the "spirit" of the
guidelines rather than "precise implementation" of it.

More context about the need is in the document - and I would really
love people to take a close look at "whys" in the documentation. I
opened the document for comments - so feel free to comment there if
you have some concrete small proposals, but I think for the wider
audience we should make "general" comments here in the comm devlist.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vp0eOeAHhRuTtps5I602MPduW7hYxtPORkkDtnlrIFo/edit

Some more comments  - more personal - why do I personally think we need it?

I think sustainability and longevity of the Foundation and the PMCs it
shepherds should be of uttermost importance. And I think in order to
achieve that, we need more individuals at different stages of their
professional career.- younger, more experienced, seasoned to be able
to make the contribution to Apache Projects independently from their
Employer funding, an important factor in the sustainability and
longevity - strengthening vendor neutrality and other Apache Way
approach.

I am an example of an individual who established relationships with 5
different businesses for my OSS contributions, and thanks to that I
can "make a living" from being an open-source contributor. I even get
enough "living" that I can afford to spend (exclusively) my own money
to go (as I did last week) to be a panelist and represent Open-Source
practitioners at the EU commission in Brussels at the workshops
https://swforum.eu/sustainability, together with Roman, Dirk and
Geertjan (and maybe there were others I am not aware of).

For me the workshops were very interesting, not only because we were
able to pass a message to those who later will be participating in
creating the laws and regulations, but also because I found that there
are also others who have the same struggles I want to address in the
document. Among other, undoubtedly important topics, I felt there were
many voices on how individuals are struggling with establishing
relations with businesses that are stakeholders in the open software
they contribute to - procurement, contracts, expectations were all
present in the voices I've heard. I could be biased of course, and
hear only what I wanted to hear stronger than other voices, but still
I think I've heard enough of the very same topics I raised in the
document.

But coming back to why I think it is needed?

I had pretty unique experience, drive and capabilities (and quite a
persistence) to get where I got now with being full-time open-source
contributor. But it was far from easy. I got a number of bits and
pieces together from various conversations and documents in order to
be able to negotiate proper contracts, know what I can expect and also
I had to convince the business partners of mine (yes - partners as I
treat them and they treat me) that what I want in the contracts (and
needs to be present due to the nature of cooperation and ASF
expectations) is OK for them. I WISH I had such a document handy when
I was negotiating my contract with Some companies (8 months was the
longest). That would have cut many discussions and off-tracks - mostly
because both parties would know for sure that the expectations of OSS
contributions are different and that they are very different from the
"standard" service contracts.

I think not many of the people who would like to be full-time
contributors will have enough financial stability, persistence,
experience in contract negotiations and sometimes just the stamina and
be bold enough to go through that without any guidelines and help. A
good example was when I was not aware that I should really publicly
state that my contributions will continue regardless if I am paid or
not - I only learned that from a comment in one of the discussions
with "longtimers" on one of the devlists.

And I think just raising awareness to both - individual and businesses
that such cooperation is not only possible but also perfectly OK with
the ASF as long as it follows certain guidelines

I also think (and I have some discussions that confirm that) that
having such guidelines published by the ASF, would enable 3rd party
companies to start providing services that would make it even easier:
payments, contract negotiations and signing, legal responsibilities,
lead generation - having such guidelines in place would remove the
need of discussion "Are we ok with ASF guidelines or not" ? And those
3rd parties will even be able to use the "we are compliant with the
ASF guidelines" message when talking to the contributors which will
make them more trustworthy.

I would love to hear what others think about it.

Any constructive comments?

Do you also find such guidelines useful and helpful ?

Have I gone too far (or not too far in trying to describe what I
understand is important?

Eager to hear your thoughts.

J.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal of guidelines for individuals <> businesses Apache Way compliant relationships

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

And in case you cannot see the attachment because of mailing list
policies - feel free to reach me out directly - I will send you a copy
by whatever means is convenient for you.

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> And following up on another (infra thread) - feel free NOT to click on
> the link in the message if you are not willing to transmit anything to
> Google.
>
> I am attaching a PDF version of the proposal for those who prefer not to.
>
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:40 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I would like to start a discussion on something I've been thinking and
> > discussing with a number of people offline, before I brought it here
> > for wider discussion.
> >
> > I want to (eventually) propose to the board of the ASF to publish
> > (formally among other ASF guidelines) a document that would make it
> > clearer to both businesses and individuals what kind of business
> > relations are "good" and "comply" with the Apache Way.
> >
> > The document is short, and follows - I think - the spirit of other
> > guidelines and policies that the ASF publishes - in terms of being
> > succinct, helpful and informative, but presenting the "spirit" of the
> > guidelines rather than "precise implementation" of it.
> >
> > More context about the need is in the document - and I would really
> > love people to take a close look at "whys" in the documentation. I
> > opened the document for comments - so feel free to comment there if
> > you have some concrete small proposals, but I think for the wider
> > audience we should make "general" comments here in the comm devlist.
> >
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vp0eOeAHhRuTtps5I602MPduW7hYxtPORkkDtnlrIFo/edit
> >
> > Some more comments  - more personal - why do I personally think we need it?
> >
> > I think sustainability and longevity of the Foundation and the PMCs it
> > shepherds should be of uttermost importance. And I think in order to
> > achieve that, we need more individuals at different stages of their
> > professional career.- younger, more experienced, seasoned to be able
> > to make the contribution to Apache Projects independently from their
> > Employer funding, an important factor in the sustainability and
> > longevity - strengthening vendor neutrality and other Apache Way
> > approach.
> >
> > I am an example of an individual who established relationships with 5
> > different businesses for my OSS contributions, and thanks to that I
> > can "make a living" from being an open-source contributor. I even get
> > enough "living" that I can afford to spend (exclusively) my own money
> > to go (as I did last week) to be a panelist and represent Open-Source
> > practitioners at the EU commission in Brussels at the workshops
> > https://swforum.eu/sustainability, together with Roman, Dirk and
> > Geertjan (and maybe there were others I am not aware of).
> >
> > For me the workshops were very interesting, not only because we were
> > able to pass a message to those who later will be participating in
> > creating the laws and regulations, but also because I found that there
> > are also others who have the same struggles I want to address in the
> > document. Among other, undoubtedly important topics, I felt there were
> > many voices on how individuals are struggling with establishing
> > relations with businesses that are stakeholders in the open software
> > they contribute to - procurement, contracts, expectations were all
> > present in the voices I've heard. I could be biased of course, and
> > hear only what I wanted to hear stronger than other voices, but still
> > I think I've heard enough of the very same topics I raised in the
> > document.
> >
> > But coming back to why I think it is needed?
> >
> > I had pretty unique experience, drive and capabilities (and quite a
> > persistence) to get where I got now with being full-time open-source
> > contributor. But it was far from easy. I got a number of bits and
> > pieces together from various conversations and documents in order to
> > be able to negotiate proper contracts, know what I can expect and also
> > I had to convince the business partners of mine (yes - partners as I
> > treat them and they treat me) that what I want in the contracts (and
> > needs to be present due to the nature of cooperation and ASF
> > expectations) is OK for them. I WISH I had such a document handy when
> > I was negotiating my contract with Some companies (8 months was the
> > longest). That would have cut many discussions and off-tracks - mostly
> > because both parties would know for sure that the expectations of OSS
> > contributions are different and that they are very different from the
> > "standard" service contracts.
> >
> > I think not many of the people who would like to be full-time
> > contributors will have enough financial stability, persistence,
> > experience in contract negotiations and sometimes just the stamina and
> > be bold enough to go through that without any guidelines and help. A
> > good example was when I was not aware that I should really publicly
> > state that my contributions will continue regardless if I am paid or
> > not - I only learned that from a comment in one of the discussions
> > with "longtimers" on one of the devlists.
> >
> > And I think just raising awareness to both - individual and businesses
> > that such cooperation is not only possible but also perfectly OK with
> > the ASF as long as it follows certain guidelines
> >
> > I also think (and I have some discussions that confirm that) that
> > having such guidelines published by the ASF, would enable 3rd party
> > companies to start providing services that would make it even easier:
> > payments, contract negotiations and signing, legal responsibilities,
> > lead generation - having such guidelines in place would remove the
> > need of discussion "Are we ok with ASF guidelines or not" ? And those
> > 3rd parties will even be able to use the "we are compliant with the
> > ASF guidelines" message when talking to the contributors which will
> > make them more trustworthy.
> >
> > I would love to hear what others think about it.
> >
> > Any constructive comments?
> >
> > Do you also find such guidelines useful and helpful ?
> >
> > Have I gone too far (or not too far in trying to describe what I
> > understand is important?
> >
> > Eager to hear your thoughts.
> >
> > J.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal of guidelines for individuals <> businesses Apache Way compliant relationships

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

And following up on another (infra thread) - feel free NOT to click on
the link in the message if you are not willing to transmit anything to
Google.

I am attaching a PDF version of the proposal for those who prefer not to.

On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:40 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I would like to start a discussion on something I've been thinking and
> discussing with a number of people offline, before I brought it here
> for wider discussion.
>
> I want to (eventually) propose to the board of the ASF to publish
> (formally among other ASF guidelines) a document that would make it
> clearer to both businesses and individuals what kind of business
> relations are "good" and "comply" with the Apache Way.
>
> The document is short, and follows - I think - the spirit of other
> guidelines and policies that the ASF publishes - in terms of being
> succinct, helpful and informative, but presenting the "spirit" of the
> guidelines rather than "precise implementation" of it.
>
> More context about the need is in the document - and I would really
> love people to take a close look at "whys" in the documentation. I
> opened the document for comments - so feel free to comment there if
> you have some concrete small proposals, but I think for the wider
> audience we should make "general" comments here in the comm devlist.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vp0eOeAHhRuTtps5I602MPduW7hYxtPORkkDtnlrIFo/edit
>
> Some more comments  - more personal - why do I personally think we need it?
>
> I think sustainability and longevity of the Foundation and the PMCs it
> shepherds should be of uttermost importance. And I think in order to
> achieve that, we need more individuals at different stages of their
> professional career.- younger, more experienced, seasoned to be able
> to make the contribution to Apache Projects independently from their
> Employer funding, an important factor in the sustainability and
> longevity - strengthening vendor neutrality and other Apache Way
> approach.
>
> I am an example of an individual who established relationships with 5
> different businesses for my OSS contributions, and thanks to that I
> can "make a living" from being an open-source contributor. I even get
> enough "living" that I can afford to spend (exclusively) my own money
> to go (as I did last week) to be a panelist and represent Open-Source
> practitioners at the EU commission in Brussels at the workshops
> https://swforum.eu/sustainability, together with Roman, Dirk and
> Geertjan (and maybe there were others I am not aware of).
>
> For me the workshops were very interesting, not only because we were
> able to pass a message to those who later will be participating in
> creating the laws and regulations, but also because I found that there
> are also others who have the same struggles I want to address in the
> document. Among other, undoubtedly important topics, I felt there were
> many voices on how individuals are struggling with establishing
> relations with businesses that are stakeholders in the open software
> they contribute to - procurement, contracts, expectations were all
> present in the voices I've heard. I could be biased of course, and
> hear only what I wanted to hear stronger than other voices, but still
> I think I've heard enough of the very same topics I raised in the
> document.
>
> But coming back to why I think it is needed?
>
> I had pretty unique experience, drive and capabilities (and quite a
> persistence) to get where I got now with being full-time open-source
> contributor. But it was far from easy. I got a number of bits and
> pieces together from various conversations and documents in order to
> be able to negotiate proper contracts, know what I can expect and also
> I had to convince the business partners of mine (yes - partners as I
> treat them and they treat me) that what I want in the contracts (and
> needs to be present due to the nature of cooperation and ASF
> expectations) is OK for them. I WISH I had such a document handy when
> I was negotiating my contract with Some companies (8 months was the
> longest). That would have cut many discussions and off-tracks - mostly
> because both parties would know for sure that the expectations of OSS
> contributions are different and that they are very different from the
> "standard" service contracts.
>
> I think not many of the people who would like to be full-time
> contributors will have enough financial stability, persistence,
> experience in contract negotiations and sometimes just the stamina and
> be bold enough to go through that without any guidelines and help. A
> good example was when I was not aware that I should really publicly
> state that my contributions will continue regardless if I am paid or
> not - I only learned that from a comment in one of the discussions
> with "longtimers" on one of the devlists.
>
> And I think just raising awareness to both - individual and businesses
> that such cooperation is not only possible but also perfectly OK with
> the ASF as long as it follows certain guidelines
>
> I also think (and I have some discussions that confirm that) that
> having such guidelines published by the ASF, would enable 3rd party
> companies to start providing services that would make it even easier:
> payments, contract negotiations and signing, legal responsibilities,
> lead generation - having such guidelines in place would remove the
> need of discussion "Are we ok with ASF guidelines or not" ? And those
> 3rd parties will even be able to use the "we are compliant with the
> ASF guidelines" message when talking to the contributors which will
> make them more trustworthy.
>
> I would love to hear what others think about it.
>
> Any constructive comments?
>
> Do you also find such guidelines useful and helpful ?
>
> Have I gone too far (or not too far in trying to describe what I
> understand is important?
>
> Eager to hear your thoughts.
>
> J.