[Koha-devel] Gitlab policy changes

[Jonathan Druart]

Sorry for the late reply, I didn't really know what to say. As I was
involved earlier in the discussion I feel that by not replying, I am
agreeing with your message, Victor. However I do not agree at all.
I do not recognize myself in your words and I do not think "scamming
gitlab" is a point of the discussion.
The matter is to know if we are eligible for a program they support,
and find the best way to apply in agreement with their terms and our
project's view.
We are relying quite a lot on gitlab, and I personally think the open
source product they provide is great. I thank their team for that.

With this answer, I only wanted to take distance with your words.
Cheers,
Jonathan



Le ven. 10 juin 2022 à 22:42, Victor Grousset/tuxayo
<victor at tuxayo.net> a écrit :
>
> On 22-05-26 01:55, dcook at prosentient.com.au wrote:
> > In theory, the organisation should be the Koha Community so it might be OK, since it doesn't sell services.
>
> In practice we would be trying to scam GitLab.com
> If we look at
> https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Roles_for_22.11
> and count for Release Manager, QA team, RMaints, Packaging Team,
> Translation Manager. We have around 17 people and between 11 and 12 are
> working or subcontracting for private support companies.
> (Assuming they are all for profit because unfortunately, almost no one
> does non profit companies even though that totally works to make a
> living out of one's business.)
>
> We might not have remorse in trying to scam a publicly traded company
> but we should be aware among ourselves that's the plan.
>
>
> On 22-05-26 12:39, Jonathan Druart wrote:
>  > There is a checkbox on the form
>  > That's the only reason I haven't filled in the form already, it's not
>  > clear to me if we are eligible or not.
>
> Reading the checkbox, it looks clear that no matter how we want to
> define maintainers. There are way too much in proportion that are
> seeking to make a profit that we can't in good faith try to negotiate
> that we still fit the criteria.
>
> We can still try and be upfront and present the project and hope that
> they want to support it.
>
> Or try to scam them without remorse because why not. It's not like
> GitLab is very respectable since they are publicly traded and the full
> version of GitLab include proprietary parts.
>
> And self-host the workers if that fails.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Victor Grousset/tuxayo