From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Pls Support Conservancy: https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:02 -0500 Message-ID: <20160117153302.GA18067@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <569B2FDC.8090207@alum.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" , Junio C Hamano , Shawn Pearce , git discussion list To: Michael Haggerty X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 17 16:33:45 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aKpKq-0001oL-7W for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:33:44 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752797AbcAQPdH (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:07 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:55116 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752669AbcAQPdG (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:06 -0500 Received: (qmail 8200 invoked by uid 102); 17 Jan 2016 15:33:04 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:04 -0500 Received: (qmail 2125 invoked by uid 107); 17 Jan 2016 15:33:24 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:24 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:33:02 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <569B2FDC.8090207@alum.mit.edu> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 07:08:28AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > > Git receives a myriad of important services (see > > https://sfconservancy.org/members/services/ ) from Conservancy. We > > have relied on Conservancy since 2009 to provide them, and we ask > > that you support them. While Git gladly contributes 10% of our > > project's gross revenue to Conservancy's general fund, (while > > Conservancy maintains and administers the other 90% in collaboration > > with us to advance the Git project), that 10% of contributions from > > all Conservancy's member projects doesn't add up to enough to even > > employ one full time person, let alone the already overworked staff > > of three that Conservancy has. > > Do we have an idea whether the Git project's 10% contribution is > covering its own costs to the SFC? 10% sounds rather low to me, given > the legal and administrative services that they provide. I'm not sure whether we have good numbers there. I think the most "expensive" thing Conservancy does for us is legal services, most of which has been for the Git trademark (preparing the application, helping write the policy, dealing with requests, etc). I don't know whether they log the hours for that or not. I've cc'd Bradley, who can probably say more. > Let's consider contributing more (e.g., 20%) of the Git project gross > revenue to SFC. I think that's a reasonable idea. We don't spend much of our money, so I don't think it would make a big impact on Git's finances. On the other hand, we don't _have_ much money in the first place. I think we have on the order of $15K collected over the last several years. So another 10% would only be $1500, or only a few hundred dollars per year. Another option would be to give a lump-sum of Git money occasionally, after seeing how much we have, upcoming expenses, etc. Besides a little bit for trademark fees (to the USPTO), I think our only expense is generally travel assistance. We have Git Merge coming up, and a couple people have asked me about assistance to the developer's summit. So I'd probably want to hold off on any lump-sum giving until we've allocated that money. We may also be able to fulfill those requests without touching Git money at all (e.g., by asking conference sponsors to chip in for developer travel). In general, we could also probably bring in more money by actively soliciting donations. We haven't so far, mostly because Git itself doesn't really do anything with the money (so there's a donation link on the git-scm.com site, but it's not very prominent). Last year the ticket money from Git Merge went entirely to Conservancy. Given the number of companies that use or build around Git, I suspect soliciting medium-to-large donations from companies would probably be productive. -Peff