We made a small change compared to last year in those criteria. We found that quite a few well-known single-maintainer projects that someone wanted to nominate had no Code of Conduct (CoC), while larger projects almost always did have a CoC. Single-maintainer projects that are critical dependencies for larger projects or a whole ecosystem are quite important (xref this XKCD comic) and we wanted to make sure they weren't excluded from consideration - hence we loosened our "must have a CoC" requirement a little.
Discussion
Loading...
@hipsterelectron i must resist the desire to make a horrifically crude joke about doing open source funding and “must have a coc”
@maxine loosening the coc constraint
weird that the coverage.py guy decides not to say thanks for supporting me but "open source" more generically (wtf is "forcefully" doing in that post lmao) https://hachyderm.io/@nedbat/115980171976283945
@hipsterelectron well QuantSight supports the scientific Python ecosystem massively, funding work on NumPy & many other libraries.
@villares yes! i am criticizing the coverage.py maintainer for using such strange language without following up on any of the points i mentioned which make their support so notable
@villares i also think it's just a weird kind of faux pas to not mention that someone is expressly supporting your project specifically and instead deferring to "open source"
@hipsterelectron it didn't sound strange to me. Couldn't he be happy for the cohort of funded projects? Both he and the recipients of the thanks knew he was one of the beneficiaries... I'm really not a good parameter. Maybe I'm also weird?
@villares i agree there's really nothing worth complaining about here thanks for checking me
@hipsterelectron apparently, “forcefully” applies to donations with a total under $20k. It’s infinitely more than I’m giving, but—you know—it’s still not a lot.
@c0dec0dec0de 0.6% of revenue isn't bad. i would like more but if google did 0.6% unrestricted funds we would have like three new bell labs by now
@c0dec0dec0de they mention being a PBC and i would certainly hope a corporation structured that way could eventually consider involving itself in the communities it builds off of more deeply. but often when there's enough money corps decide they should be getting something in return for that investment and that has its own problems
"having a coc" is a fucking hilarious description. like saying your country must have a constitution. have you read the rust coc https://rust-lang.org/policies/code-of-conduct/
- Please avoid using overtly sexual aliases or other nicknames
- Please be kind and courteous.
- There is seldom a right answer.
- Please keep unstructured critique to a minimum.
- Likewise any spamming, trolling, flaming, baiting or other attention-stealing behavior is not welcome.
@hipsterelectron please sir no more coc
0.6% of revenue with unrestricted funds is awesome. you know how easily so many corps could just write a check today like that
@hipsterelectron can you explain to me, an unwashed normie without tech knowledge, what unrestricted means in this context?
Last year, we launched our first OSS Fund as an experiment. The positive feedback from our team, the recipients, and the broader community confirmed its value. We have therefore decided to make the fund a permanent pillar of how we run Quansight, as a valuable addition to other forms of sponsorships (e.g., for nonprofits and conferences) and to building bridges with more maintainers to jointly apply for funding or collaborate on existing funded projects.
nice to see a corporation motivated by doing stuff that's cool instead of jockeying to do the most stuff that sucks
the other thing "having a coc" does is to affect the appearance of due diligence without actually placing any constraints on behavior. it's a legal gray area whether sponsorships serve the purpose of endorsements. it's a gray area because corps generally want it both ways:
(a) they get to look good to the select group of high performing engineers who contribute to open source
(b) they get to buy the maintainer's silence and reluctance to criticize them without any lasting contract or healthcare plan
and should the maintainer overcome their usefulness, they can be safely smeared as a foreign agent without turning up awkward questions about previous supporters
@hipsterelectron FOSS bros think "having a coc" is what matters? Checks out... 🤦
usually when athletes or other celebrities get sponsored it takes the form of a contract and can be severed as a statement from the company directly opposing the change (this is what happened to kanye)