I think the founds recibed need to be parted a bit to founds, Inkscape related we/man power
If posible I want to add me to the list of devs
All the best, Javier.
Enviado desde TypeApp
En 6 sept. 2017 8:51, en 8:51, C R <cajhne@...400...> escribió:
Sounds great for the main project, however even a year long position is not much job security for full time developers. This is where Patreon provides a convenient solution for some of our current developers - they can see what their monthly salary is and set it as high as they need to complete the work.
That doesn't mean we can't do both. I think we should still support developers who want to use Patreon to do independent work on Inkscape. Also, self promotion need not be the only method of getting donors. We do have a new Vectors group whose job it is to promote Inkscape. We should offer its services to long time Inkscape developers who wish an independent way to raise funds for development work, even if it's just a hold over until Inkscape gets enough funds for permanent positions.
Either way, I'm at your service for graphics stuff, as I imagine are most of the other Vectors team members. Let us know what you need. :)
-C
On 6 Sep 2017 2:52 a.m., "Bryce Harrington" <bryce@...961...> wrote:
There's been interest of late in figuring out some options for
funding
development work on Inkscape. I'm thrilled to hear this as I also
think
it's an important direction for Inkscape's longer term health, and something I've been working on directly myself for some time now.
I promised Martin I'd write a thorough response to his proposal, including the course of action I think we should undertake, which
makes
for a long read, so I apologize upfront about the length.
First, let me share my thoughts on Patreon and why we should not rely
on
it for our *project* needs.
Patreon looks interesting for individual developers, but for the Inkscape project in general what we really need is a mechanism to
direct
and focus funds towards the issues our donors, users, and developers care about collectively, and to provide them with a level of accountability that the funds are being put to good use for tangible, predictable benefits. Patreon is undirected, simply providing
funding
for whatever the recipient wishes to do. It provides no mechanisms
for
review, guidance, or transparency.
Martin suggested advertising placement on the Inkscape website and utilizing trademark legal enforcement as a carrot/stick mechanism to help ensure the recipients are at least working actively on Inkscape.
However, website placement is likely going to be contentious since it relies on donors selecting who to fund. They'll either pick the most popular, the guy at the top of the list, the biggest self-promotor,
or
randomly. We can strive very hard to make it "fair" but with money involved there will always be complaints, and someone feeling that someone else is getting more funding priority than they "deserve". Despite our best of intentions, this feels likely to turn into a can
of
worms.
The use of trademark enforcement is an interesting angle, by
restricting
who can label themselves as "Inkscape Developers". However, I
believe
trademark law does not work that way, and even if it did would be difficult to enforce, requiring the involvement of the Conservancy to issue cease-and-desist letters -- I think we'd end up deciding the marginal benefits would not make up for the time, manpower, and
stress
investments of dealing with abusers flouting our trademark rules. It may work adequately as a gentlemen's agreement, but if someone truly challenges it, I fear our enforcement will be revealed to be a paper tiger.
But we needn't overthink it to that level - fundamentally,
restricting
how other developers define themselves within our community is at
odds
with our egalitarian principles, and does not respect the development freedom we cherish. If someone wants to refer to themselves as an Inkscape Developer, we should encourage it.
Fortunately, we can achieve a much better approach by focusing our efforts more intently into the funded projects system already under
way.
Paid developer work has been long discussed in our project. We've looked at bounty systems, direct patron sponsorship, straight up contracting, and so on, that other projects have experimented with. We approached the Software Conservancy with these ideas and hashed
them
out into a workable system, after months of discussion and drafting.
The essence of the system is straightforward:
- We post a list of approved jobs, similar to our GSoC lists.
- Money from donations can be directed towards jobs the donors
want
to see done. Small donations can be aggregated together to provide big funding for larger efforts.
- We carefully vet developers who wish to take jobs, similar to
how
we vet GSoC students, but also judge their past work, historyof
Inkscape involvement, etc.
- Vetted developers can take approved jobs when the funding level reaches the amount they feel is appropriate to the work, by sending in a Job Proposal (similar to GSoC), that we review and accept.
- Developers are required to post monthly reports, just like
GSoC.
Each job also defines an expected time limit, like with GSoC.
- On job completion, a Reviewer checks that the requirements were met, and the payment is cut.
The process is strongly modeled after Google Summer of Code, which
has
been proven effective for us historically. It builds in several checkpoints to ensure bad actors don't enter the system, and to
ensure
accountability and transparency into the development work. It also empowers and leverage donors to influence where their money gets invested, both to give them a level of ownership and to use their donation decisions as "crowd wisdom" to ensure we're putting money
where
it will most benefit the Inkscape community's needs.
One important distinction from GSoC is that jobs don't need to be
fixed
sized to fit 3-month summer schedules. This system should work for quick turn-around 1-2 week projects, up to multi-month or even
year-long
efforts. Whatever we need. It also doesn't have to be feature work, but could target bug fixing, website work, documentation. Whatever
we
need.
A final benefit - this system's already been reviewed and approved by Software Conservancy's lawyers. So, while there might be some bumps along the way, there is no reason we can't start using it
immediately.
What I have been working on myself is Django-based software that
would
enable us to scale the system up to handle a multitude of project
ideas,
track jobs in various states of completion, and coordiate work by arbitrary numbers of developers, vetters, and reviewers. It aims to also directly hook the donation system into the project listings so a donor has instant feedback of the effect of their funds. This is complex, as you can imagine, and with my time being in short supply
it's
been slow going.
However, for small scale needs the software is superfluous, we can do all the same steps manually, tracking status in a google spreadsheet
or
whatever. And for the near term, I think we should. Here's what
we'd
need to do:
Designate several people to defined roles:
- Fundraising coordinator.
- Vetter (must be a board member)
- Reviewer
Add more Job definitions.
- For each Job we define Completion Criteria
- Board can vote to make certain of them immediately fundable.
Organize an online fundraiser.
- Set up is just as we've done for hackfest fundraising, but with
a
detailed list of what Jobs are specifically being funded. + Donated funds are distributed equally to the specific Jobs we list. + Board can vote to assign Inkscape funds, too.
- Recruit developers to participate
- We already know of several (Mc, Tav); put out a call for more
- Vetter will receive job proposals and review applicants, check that they've been actively contributing, and look able to
complete
assigned work, have provided payment details, etc. + Once vetter gives OK on a given job proposal, work can begin immediatelyWhen the work is done, the Reviewer reviews it, and I notify
Conservancy
to cut a check or wire transfer to the person that did it.
This system is set up to make payments after completion, rather than reliably regular monthly payments, and I know that will be an issue
for
people needing predictable income for covering monthly rent and so
on.
One way we can hack around that is instead of defining one big
3-month
job, to break it up into three 1-month (160 hr, $2000+) jobs assigned
to
them that they perform sequentially. This will require more reviewer involvement, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
For all of this to work, though, I would need to recruit a number of
you
to help out in various roles. I don't think these roles will be time consuming, but you'd need to commit to being available regularly as stuff comes up.
How does this plan sound in concept?
Bryce
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel