[Members] S is for Software once more?

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Wed Apr 13 06:54:15 UTC 2016

On 12 Apr 2016 21:44, "Kevin Smith" <kevin.smith at isode.com> wrote:
> On 21 Mar 2016, at 15:50, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> > I've sounded out a couple of other XMPP related projects who do not
have any legal existence, and there seems to be some interest in the XSF
taking this on from their perspective - not least because it is felt that
the XSF is most likely to understand the community and allow it to remain
> >
> > From the community's perspective, there is no expectation of wanting
the XSF to provide hosting, or accept other costs. We do need some kind of
legal existence in order to protect the IPR assets we have (the domain name
and trademark), and we may in the future need an entity who can accept
donations on our behalf. We would expect, and indeed hope, that the XSF
offer similar to other client libraries, servers, and other "competing"
> >
> > From the XSF's perspective, I believe that if this were the only
project (or community of them) interesting in this kind of arrangement,
there would be a risk of an appearance of bias - so again, I would hope
there are other projects in similar spaces which would be interested, and
moreover, I would avoid any illusion of control from the XSF, lest this
imply a recommendation or approval.
> >
> > I'm intending raising this at the Board meeting in a little over an
hour, but I'm not anticipating any kind of decision at this time given the
very short notice and magnitude of this. Given I'm crippled by the weight
of many hats in this, I find myself unable to form a fully impartial
opinion - no matter what hat I wear - and will therefore be recusing myself
from any voting in both camps in any case (not that the Ignite Realtime
community votes).
> >
> > Nonetheless, I'd welcome comments - do we want the XSF to take on a
role similar to SPI, the Software Conservancy, et al? Who would decide
which projects to accept if we did? Who else would be interested?
> I was waiting to respond to this to see if anything happened. There
doesn’t seem to be any movement, so I’m not going to waste time on a long
essay for a stalled idea, but I also don’t want silence to imply
endorsement. I’ll just say that I have a few concerns with this,
particularly around the cost to to the XSF (which is always
volunteer-light) and seeming endorsement.

I was expecting at least one other project to raise their voice, but they
haven't. As such, I'm not going to take this further.

> /K
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20160413/83f59e72/attachment.html>

More information about the Members mailing list