Re: [opensuse-project] openSUSE Foundation
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 05. Juli 2018 um 10:34 Uhr Von: "Christian Bruckmayer" <cbruckmayer@suse.com> An: opensuse-project@opensuse.org Betreff: Re: [opensuse-project] openSUSE Foundation On 07/05/2018 02:24 AM, Simon Lees wrote: [snip]
Yes we have no intention of moving away from our great relationship with > SUSE, at the same time there have been financial restrictions / > limitations with our current arrangement that have made it impossible to > work with organizations outside of SUSE with our current setup (example > below), this and other less major issues have lead the board to believe > that we need an alternative solution at times when dealing with sponsors > outside of SUSE, If SUSE finds it beneficial to also use this > alternative solution at times then they are more then welcome too but we > are expecting that atleast most of the time they probably wont. > > As I mentioned in a previous email last year google offered to sponsor > openSUSE in order to to send some people involved in GSoC to an event, > at the time SUSE's budgets were frozen and they were unable to accept / > use this money on openSUSE's behalf and as a result people missed out on > traveling to an event that would have been fully paid for. The board is > very keen to ensure that such a situation does not happen again and that > we have an alternative way of accepting the sponsorship. Even if this > alternative way is only ever used sparingly in cases when SUSE can't > accept the money for whatever reason or in cases where I third party > doesn't want to donate via SUSE because they have no way of confirming > the money they donate will actually be spent on openSUSE. As I was the Google Summer of Code admin the last three years, I want to give some more insights.
openSUSE participates since many years in GSoC. To reward the organizations, Google offers every year a donation. This donation is usually 1100 USD travel stipend for two mentors + 500 USD for every student we mentored (+ 500 additional travel stipend). For openSUSE it was usually around 5-6k USD. The mentor travel stipend is intended to send two mentors to the annual GSoC mentor summit at the Google campus in Sunnyvale. As openSUSE has no bank account, the only way to accept money (in an official way) is to use a SUSE account. However, we needed to use a MicroFocus account in the end. Therefore every year I have several long conversations with people from MF accounting and legal if we're allowed (this is not a very common scenario for SUSE as we usually SELL something before we receive money) and how we can accept the money (every year it starts again because people left, process changed etc etc). After we finally get all the information and approval to send the money to a MF account, the money "vanishes" and I need to tell the openSUSE board to state this money in the next "budget planning" (not sure what happens exactly behind the scenes here). If this process would be feasible if I wouldn't be a SUSE employee, I don't know! So the issue we had last year was that we received the travel stipend from Google but we were not allowed to spend it because of the frozen budget. This caused some frustration among our mentors. If this is the only issue we have with receiving / spending money, than an openSUSE foundation might be overkill. If there are more issues like this... Christian We had more issues with SUSE last year. Damaged hardware and full disks in the openSUSE infrastructure are an example. The replacement was declined because of missing money. If we would have our own budget and an bank account with money by other sponsors, we have a lower number of such problems. Best regards, Sarah -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
On 6 July 2018 at 18:49, Sarah Julia Kriesch <ada.lovelace@gmx.de> wrote:
We had more issues with SUSE last year. Damaged hardware and full disks in the openSUSE infrastructure are an example. The replacement was declined because of missing money.
If we would have our own budget and an bank account with money by other sponsors, we have a lower number of such problems.
I wouldn't describe the situation with hardware as "declined because of missing money" To understand the situation you need to understand the difference between Opertional Expenditures (OPEX) and Capitcal Expenditures (CAPEX) https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/what-difference-between-cape... SUSE's sponsorship of openSUSE is done using an OPEX budget That means the budget is annual, with operational expenditures being fully tax-deductible in the year they are made. OPEX budgets can only be used for things like Utilities, Travel Expenses, Merchandise, and the general funds needed to keep the openSUSE machine running smoothly. Computer Hardware would be a Capital expenditure (CAPEX) CAPEX needs to be planned in advance and for tax purposes each capital asset is tracked for several years for depreciation. ie. It's not something which can just be easily thrown around reactively, and has consequences lasting years. SUSE has no CAPEX budget for openSUSE. None of our hardware sponsors have dedicated CAPEX budgets for openSUSE. All hardware we have from all of our hardware sponsors (eg. SUSE, AMD, AppliedMicro, etc) is provided to us physically precisely so that openSUSE doesn't need to worry itself with the complexities of managing a CAPEX budget. That's why we have the big button for "Contribute Hardware" on opensuse.org that leads directly to our dedicated email address (donations@opensuse.org) for handling such arrangements In the case you refer to, yes, a disk broke, but I consider it unreasonable to expect SUSE to have been able to magically create previously unbudgeted Capital funds to purchase the hardware required to replace that which was broken. If we had our own budget, we'd likely have similar problems to magically allocate funds for such unexpected replacements. The laws regarding CAPEX and OPEX are likely to be MORE complicated for any budget operated by openSUSE, what with European and American laws being as they are for ensuring non-profits are not used for money laundering. I think we are always going to be dependant on the goodwill of sponsors to provide us with hardware to operate at the scale we are used to. As it happens in the case you refer to, I believe workarounds were found and put in place, services were kept running, and no major negative impact was felt by the project or contributors. And if we're lucky SUSE might even slip in a few line items into their next CAPEX budget planning for openSUSE to help relieve any pressure there. Which means I think it's very different from the situation described by Christian where contributors were negatively impacted in very real terms, and we don't have any real mitigations available to avoid a possible repeat, besides good luck and best intentions. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/07/18 05:35, Richard Brown wrote:
On 6 July 2018 at 18:49, Sarah Julia Kriesch <ada.lovelace@gmx.de> wrote:
We had more issues with SUSE last year. Damaged hardware and full disks in the openSUSE infrastructure are an example. The replacement was declined because of missing money.
If we would have our own budget and an bank account with money by other sponsors, we have a lower number of such problems.
I wouldn't describe the situation with hardware as "declined because of missing money"
To understand the situation you need to understand the difference between Opertional Expenditures (OPEX) and Capitcal Expenditures (CAPEX)
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/what-difference-between-cape...
SUSE's sponsorship of openSUSE is done using an OPEX budget
That means the budget is annual, with operational expenditures being fully tax-deductible in the year they are made. OPEX budgets can only be used for things like Utilities, Travel Expenses, Merchandise, and the general funds needed to keep the openSUSE machine running smoothly.
Computer Hardware would be a Capital expenditure (CAPEX) CAPEX needs to be planned in advance and for tax purposes each capital asset is tracked for several years for depreciation.
ie. It's not something which can just be easily thrown around reactively, and has consequences lasting years.
SUSE has no CAPEX budget for openSUSE. None of our hardware sponsors have dedicated CAPEX budgets for openSUSE.
All hardware we have from all of our hardware sponsors (eg. SUSE, AMD, AppliedMicro, etc) is provided to us physically precisely so that openSUSE doesn't need to worry itself with the complexities of managing a CAPEX budget. That's why we have the big button for "Contribute Hardware" on opensuse.org that leads directly to our dedicated email address (donations@opensuse.org) for handling such arrangements
In the case you refer to, yes, a disk broke, but I consider it unreasonable to expect SUSE to have been able to magically create previously unbudgeted Capital funds to purchase the hardware required to replace that which was broken.
If we had our own budget, we'd likely have similar problems to magically allocate funds for such unexpected replacements. The laws regarding CAPEX and OPEX are likely to be MORE complicated for any budget operated by openSUSE, what with European and American laws being as they are for ensuring non-profits are not used for money laundering.
I think we are always going to be dependant on the goodwill of sponsors to provide us with hardware to operate at the scale we are used to.
As it happens in the case you refer to, I believe workarounds were found and put in place, services were kept running, and no major negative impact was felt by the project or contributors. And if we're lucky SUSE might even slip in a few line items into their next CAPEX budget planning for openSUSE to help relieve any pressure there.
Which means I think it's very different from the situation described by Christian where contributors were negatively impacted in very real terms, and we don't have any real mitigations available to avoid a possible repeat, besides good luck and best intentions.
For example the way that SPI Handles / Gets around this is by stating that any assets over $300 that we purchase with funds out of there account remain owned by SPI but are loaned indefinitely to the project that purchased them. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
For example the way that SPI Handles / Gets around this is by stating that any assets over $300 that we purchase with funds out of there account remain owned by SPI but are loaned indefinitely to the project that purchased them.
If it is owned by a US enterprise, how could we escape their laws there and respect other GRPD and so... Last time we look at SPI solution (my board time), it was not possible to use the money easily outside of us, so could you double check the following use case. An european generous donators give funds to the project, with for example half is used to bought hardware for datacenter(whatever place that one is) and the other half is for sponsoring directly people invest in event happening in EU ? Thanks for your quest -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch Bareos Partner, openSUSE Member, fsfe supporter GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
On 13 July 2018 at 19:27, Bruno Friedmann <bruno@ioda-net.ch> wrote:
For example the way that SPI Handles / Gets around this is by stating that any assets over $300 that we purchase with funds out of there account remain owned by SPI but are loaned indefinitely to the project that purchased them.
If it is owned by a US enterprise, how could we escape their laws there and respect other GRPD and so...
Last time we look at SPI solution (my board time), it was not possible to use the money easily outside of us, so could you double check the following use case.
An european generous donators give funds to the project, with for example half is used to bought hardware for datacenter(whatever place that one is) and the other half is for sponsoring directly people invest in event happening in EU ?
Thanks for your quest
SPI have a partner in Europe for facilitating donations http://www.ffis.de/Verein/spi-en.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
Am 13. Juli 2018 20:52:59 MESZ schrieb Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@opensuse.org>:
For example the way that SPI Handles / Gets around this is by
stating
that any assets over $300 that we purchase with funds out of there account remain owned by SPI but are loaned indefinitely to the
that purchased them.
If it is owned by a US enterprise, how could we escape their laws
and respect other GRPD and so...
Last time we look at SPI solution (my board time), it was not
On 13 July 2018 at 19:27, Bruno Friedmann <bruno@ioda-net.ch> wrote: project there possible to use
the money easily outside of us, so could you double check the following use case.
An european generous donators give funds to the project, with for example half is used to bought hardware for datacenter(whatever place that one is) and the other half is for sponsoring directly people invest in event happening in EU ?
Thanks for your quest
SPI have a partner in Europe for facilitating donations
So why not going directly with ffis? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
On 14/07/18 23:22, Axel Braun wrote:
Am 13. Juli 2018 20:52:59 MESZ schrieb Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@opensuse.org>:
For example the way that SPI Handles / Gets around this is by
stating
that any assets over $300 that we purchase with funds out of there account remain owned by SPI but are loaned indefinitely to the
that purchased them.
If it is owned by a US enterprise, how could we escape their laws
and respect other GRPD and so...
Last time we look at SPI solution (my board time), it was not
On 13 July 2018 at 19:27, Bruno Friedmann <bruno@ioda-net.ch> wrote: project there possible to use
the money easily outside of us, so could you double check the following use case.
An european generous donators give funds to the project, with for example half is used to bought hardware for datacenter(whatever place that one is) and the other half is for sponsoring directly people invest in event happening in EU ?
Thanks for your quest
SPI have a partner in Europe for facilitating donations
So why not going directly with ffis?
Maybe we will, we are investigating a number of different foundations / organizations that we could partner with. To assess which if any is best for openSUSE to partner with. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
On 16 July 2018 at 05:05, Simon Lees <sflees@suse.de> wrote:
On 14/07/18 23:22, Axel Braun wrote:
SPI have a partner in Europe for facilitating donations
So why not going directly with ffis?
Maybe we will, we are investigating a number of different foundations / organizations that we could partner with. To assess which if any is best for openSUSE to partner with.
Indeed, and while I wouldn't want to rule them out at this stage, I can think of a number of issues that hold back the idea of ffis for openSUSE All the ffis documentation is only in German. As any change of this type is likely to involve consultation with the broader community, I think it really holds back the viability of joining ffis given the operating language of the Project is predominantly English. How can the openSUSE community agree to anything if we don't understand it well? Conversely, most (if not all) of the questions asked here that I've answered about SPI for example can be independently confirmed by reading https://www.spi-inc.org/. ffis state they prefer the GPL or LGPL SPI state they prefer the GPL or "other licenses that allow free redistribution and use of software and hardware developers to distribute documentation that will allow device drivers to be written for their product" the ffis statement is somewhat more restrictive, and while the distributions would meet that standard, not all sub-projects under the openSUSE Project are GPL/LGPL licensed. Whereas I believe all we do in the openSUSE Project would comply with SPI's preferences And last but by no means least, ffis has 1 software project, two conferences, and a spinoff of the Knoppix distribution under their wing Meanwhile SPI have a members list of at least 45 projects, including big names like Debian, Arch, FFmpeg, freedesktop, LibreOffice, Jenkins, OpenEmbedded, PostgreSQL, X.Org and more If the Project goes down this route, we'll want to collectively hitch our wagon to an organisation we can trust with our money and assets, and trust to be there for a long period of time. With such a broader collection of projects engaged with them, I think that's easier to be said with SPI than with ffis -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Axel Braun -
Bruno Friedmann -
Richard Brown -
Sarah Julia Kriesch -
Simon Lees