Re: git as an sfc member project

Shawn Pearce [off-list ref] writes:

The people listed in 2 as the leadership structure of git.
...

quoted

    Personally, I favor a small group which can approve new people to
    join, and which can leave at will. Having more than one person
    avoids hit-by-bus problems (or even just dropped-off-net problems).
    There is little enough power in such a position that I'm not too
    worried about some crazed egomaniac becoming the Git-SFC liaison.

I agree.

I think a committee of at least 3 people and at most 5, any of whom
can be a benevolent SFC liasion, is fine.  As far as selection goes,
the committee can elect or remove a member through a majority vote,
and should base its decisions based on surviving contributions to the
code base, but shouldn't be tied to that (just in case someone
contributes a lot of good code and then becomes a jerk).

Small group like 3 to 5 to avoid bus factor sounds reasonable to me.

Because my involvement in the project does not relate to monetizing git, I
can safely be included in them, I think.  If people do not mind me being
that jerk you meantioned, that is ;-)

quoted

 3. How much money should we give to the SFC?

    A big chunk of their budget comes from taking a percentage of
    member project money. As a project, we set the percentage we give
    them. So we can give them nothing if we want. But they do provide
    useful services, and even without direct benefit to git, the SFC is
    promoting free software. So probably it makes sense to choose some
    non-zero number.

I agree, a non-zero number.  2-5%?  Any idea what is typical?

As you two agreed 10% sounds fair to me.