Re: Possible inclusion in commercial support list

[John W. Eaton]

On 02/28/2017 03:18 PM, mbro009 wrote:

> I think the consensus is that my previous proposal is not accepted. I would
> like to withdraw my previous proposal and put forward the following one. I
> am very grateful for your time so far.

OK.  I think it's probably a good idea to start over here.  You could 
start by saying something like "Hi, I'm ... and I'm interested in 
starting a support business for Octave.  It seems like there's probably 
a big market out there for this sort of thing and I'm a bit surprised as 
to why no one is already doing this.  Is there anything I should know? 
Anyway, here's how I think it could work.  [... some details...]  What 
do you think?"  Or, if you are reluctant to share too much, then maybe 
ask if there are people who would be interested in discussing this off 
list.  Then maybe we could have a meaningful discussion.

> 1. We will provide a mirror for GNU Octave. We will not have a separate
> version.
> 2. We will provide support contracts for GNU Octave, designed and provided
> under terms set by us.

OK, anyone is free to provide support for Octave.  That's part of the 
reason for the GPL in the first place, so that users have more than one 
option for support.

> 3. A proportion of the revenue obtained directly from the support contracts
> for GNU Octave will be donated to GNU Octave for development of new features
> and general work. The proportion will be determined by us given current and
> forecast profitability. The features and work that is completed using these
> funds is to be selected by us (but still requiring approval by GNU Octave
> maintainers) in the interest of commercial customers;  developers are
> selected by GNU Octave provided there is equal opportunity and equity in
> selection, and GNU Octave is transparent about equal opportunity statistics.
> Developers selected must be job-seekers and complete the work under contract
> to GNU Octave as the contracting party and mentored by GNU Octave
> maintainers, i.e. they cannot currently be employed in a public or private
> institution.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but you seem to be under the impression that 
"GNU Octave" is some kind of legal entity that can make decisions.  "GNU 
Octave" is the software and what we sometimes call the "Octave Project" 
is just a group of volunteers.  There is no business behind it that can 
hire people.  And, like Juan Pablo, I don't understand the part about 
"job seekers".  What difference does it make who does the work?

> 4. The GNU Octave group is completely transparent in the spending of all
> funds provided to it by commercial sponsors.

The FSF, which currently collects funds for the Octave Project is a 
charity in the US and must disclose how it spends the contributions it 
receives.  When the FSF transfers funds to the Octave Project, the 
spending must be accounted for and in accordance with the rules 
governing 501c(3) charities in the US, and the charter/by-laws of the FSF.

> 5. A non-exclusive relationship. i.e. we are completely free to sell and
> develop and make available other solutions, services and products.

OK.

> 6. GNU Octave will consider rewording some sentences on this page:
> https://www.gnu.org/software/octave/support-expectations.html. Note, we will
> be approaching things from a commercial perspective of trying to make
> customers happy. For example, “Unfortunately, there are a few people who
> behave as though the community owes them support as well as a 100% Matlab
> compatible system, all at zero cost. It shouldn’t really be necessary, but
> we’ll say it anyway: working with these people is no fun. If you approach
> the Octave community this way, you are sure to be disappointed. You should
> also not be surprised when your requests for help are ignored.”

Sure, we can consider it.  But this is my position on what it is like to 
deal with people who wish to take advantage of unpaid support provided 
by volunteers.  It is a statement from the Octave Project.  You are free 
to market your services however you choose, provided that you adhere to 
the license terms of GNU Octave.

FWIW, I think the biggest barrier to starting a business supporting 
Octave is that the community already provides pretty great support *for 
free*.  That's the real value of Octave.  It's not the code.  It's the 
people who are working on it.  Maybe it would be easier to get people to 
pay if you could hire all the top contributors and get them to enter 
into an exclusive relationship with your company such that they only 
provide support to paying customers and stop providing gratis support.

jwe