Hi Ted,

thanks for your feedback! I had already included the first two points after the PLC meeting.

Regarding the mentoring / hiring process: this is a very good point. I've modified the proposal such that 1) the hiring team is appointed by the PLC in the original vote 2) it consists of 1 SFC staff plus up to 4 contributors (we already have volunteers), which are excluded from applying themselves, 3) they need to agree unanimously on a possible extension of the project, working around the alleged slowness of the PLC.

Re: copyright: this should be specified in the contract, and I'm sure the SFC has templates for that. Publishing all results of the project under GPL2+ terms should be part of the contract. Whether the copyright holder is technically Inkscape or the candidate could be worked out; I suppose in the latter case the candidate could also publish it under a different license. IMO this does not need to be fully decided when the PLC votes on the project.

Best regards,

Jonathan

Howdy folks,

Sorry for the delay.  Here is a link to the current proposal:

https://office.inkscape.org/nextcloud/index.php/s/jm7qoX9cK7LRnYG

What I wanted to do is kinda pull together all the feedback. Here is the the ideas that I think came up in the PLC meeting (not all by me) but I wanted to write down for those who couldn't make it:

• People generally seemed happy with the idea of paying for reviews/mentorship though it seemed like folks weren't sure on how much seemed right. Probably a different amount for each.
• We talked about reimbursing for a Creative Cloud license to create test files

Some additional thoughts.

• I think we need to either specify the reviewers/mentors in the proposal or a process to choose them just to ensure there is no conflicts of interest, etc.
• The proposal was written up to suggest that we'd do the first 6 weeks, and then a PLC vote. I can't speak for everyone, but I think the review team could decide on the second six weeks not the PLC. The PLC is slow 😄
• We should probably include a comment in the job request mentioning the net30 payment schedule, just to be entirely clear for anyone who would apply.
• I'm not sure, and I'm not sure if Pono knows, but we should probably clarify licensing and/or copyright ownership. This seems to me to be work-for-hire which would mean that Inkscape would own copyright. I don't think that folks would have an issue with that as we'd release it as GPLv2+ with everything else. But we should be clear.

Overall, I'll say again I'm excited about the progress on this. Thanks to all who contributed!

Ted