Clarify the Charter so that contractors are explicity counted as affialiated #1650
Conversation
|
cc @nodejs/tsc |
Co-authored-by: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
|
Not a lawyer, I assume sponsorships that bound with goals are not considered as some sort of "by any possible means, ... and contractual obligations". Is this a correct assumption? |
|
@legendecas Naively, I'd assume that paying for a streaming service is a contractual obligation, but that what you are describing is not :) |
| the same company (by any possible means, both as employment and contractual | ||
| obligations). | ||
| If a change in TSC voting membership or a change of employment by a TSC voting member | ||
| creates a situation where more than one-fourth of the TSC voting membership are | ||
| affiliated with the same company, then the situation must be immediately remedied | ||
| by the removal of voting member status from one or more TSC voting members affiliated | ||
| with the over-represented company. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| the same company (by any possible means, both as employment and contractual | |
| obligations). | |
| If a change in TSC voting membership or a change of employment by a TSC voting member | |
| creates a situation where more than one-fourth of the TSC voting membership are | |
| affiliated with the same company, then the situation must be immediately remedied | |
| by the removal of voting member status from one or more TSC voting members affiliated | |
| with the over-represented company. | |
| the same company (by any possible means, both as employment and contractual | |
| obligations). | |
| If a change in TSC voting membership or a change of employment by a TSC voting member | |
| creates a situation where more than one-fourth of the TSC voting membership are | |
| affiliated with the same company, then the situation must be immediately remedied | |
| by the removal of voting member status from one or more TSC voting members affiliated | |
| with the over-represented company. | |
| Affiliation definition: | |
| - Affiliation includes direct employment, substantial contractual obligations (e.g., over 50% of income from one company), or formal representation of a company's interests (board member, etc..). Contributions funded through general-purpose sponsorship platforms (e.g., Tidelift, GitHub Sponsors) are not automatically considered an affiliation unless they are explicitly tied to a single company's funding or interests. | |
| - Contractors and freelancers are considered affiliated with a company only if the majority of their time or income is tied to a single company for work directly related to the project's scope. | |
| - Individuals funded by public grants or organizations serving as fiscal hosts (e.g., Alpha Omega, STF) are not considered affiliated unless their work explicitly and exclusively represents the interests of a single company. | |
| - TSC members must update their affiliations quarterly or upon any significant change in their employment or contractual status. A shared disclosure registry should be maintained to track affiliations transparently while protecting personal privacy. |
I appreciate this policy change and the intent behind it, as it aims to foster diversity and balanced representation within the TSC 👏.
However, I’d like to highlight a few scenarios where the updated wording might create complexities or unintended challenges:
1. Maintainers Funded by Sponsorship Platforms: Developers supported through platforms like Tidelift, GitHub Sponsors, or Open Collective may now fall under the “affiliation” category if a significant portion of their income originates from a single company using these platforms. This could inadvertently include individuals whose primary contributions are to other open-source projects. Also in some cases you have to sign a service contract sharing an employer/client with the platform itself (Tidelift case)
2. Contractors and Fiscal Hosts: The inclusion of contractors under the expanded definition of affiliation could lead to complications. For instance, if a company acts as a fiscal host for public grants (e.g., Alpha Omega, STF) and engages several contractors for open-source contributions, all those contractors might be considered affiliated, potentially affecting the TSC's compliance with the rule. Note that Public grants/foundations are not in scope as they are non-profit and we only refer to "companies" in this policy.
3. Broader Scope and Implications: The broadened definition of affiliation increases the administrative burden on TSC members to maintain updated and accurate records of their affiliations. This is particularly relevant for freelancers or contractors who often work with multiple clients simultaneously, some of which may fall under the scope of this policy.
Given these broader implications, it might be beneficial to establish a mechanism for regularly updating and tracking affiliations. This could include clear guidelines on what constitutes "affiliation" in various scenarios and a streamlined process to ensure compliance while minimizing misunderstandings
By adding a sharper definition we can avoid some of this scenarios, but maybe I am overthinking here 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sponsorship doesn’t create contractual obligations by definition, and I’d say any time there’s money changing hands that’s tied to specific deliverables, it’s an affiliation, and github sponsors doesn’t require a specific callout. (Tidelift is a gray area where the money is paid unrelated to deliverables, but there’s a contractual expectation that certain standards should be maintained, so I’d prefer to see that not count as an affiliation)
Some people mighrt be contracted to work on OSS on behalf of companies. This does not make them less affiliated, and it might be used to circumvent the affiliation rules.