[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Sponsors & Funding

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

On Fri, 12 Sept 2025, 00:26 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> Hi Gyan
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 01:41:24PM +0530, Gyan Doshi via ffmpeg-devel
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2025-09-11 02:22 am, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > Hi Kieran
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 06:21:56PM +0200, Kieran Kunhya via
> ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 10 Sept 2025, 17:49 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
> > > > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi remi
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 07:29:02PM +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont via
> > > > > ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > > > > > Le tiistaina 9. syyskuuta 2025, 15.10.37 Itä-Euroopan kesäaika
> Michael
> > > > > > Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel a écrit :
> > > > > > > > 2) A legal entity with clear oversight rules that sponsors
> can trust
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > influence collects funding from sponsors and decides whom to
> pay for
> > > > > > > > what.
> > > > > > > We have that:
> > > > > > > "Software in the Public Interest (SPI) is a non-profit
> corporation
> > > > > > > registered in the state of New York founded to act as a fiscal
> sponsor
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > organizations that develop open source software and hardware.
> Our
> > > > > mission
> > > > > > > is to help substantial and  significant open source projects by
> > > > > handling
> > > > > > > their non-technical administrative tasks so that they aren't
> required
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > operate their own legal entity."
> > > > > > How does that enable large sponsors to influence what gets done
> with the
> > > > > money?
> > > > > > How does that take care of drafting and reviewing contracts?
> That just
> > > > > takes
> > > > > > care of fiscal and admin problems. It's great that they do it at
> all,
> > > > > but it's
> > > > > > not remotely sufficient in this context.
> > > > > With souvereign tech fund we had contracts between people, STF and
> SPI.
> > > > >
> > > > > SPI did provide for the legal, accounting and paperwork services
> here.
> > > > > We should in fact donate to them for doing that for us. (if we did
> not yet)
> > > > >
> > > > SPI is not accountable to the GA.
> > > Lets go down that rabbit hole.
> > >
> > > For this subject to make any sense, we need to have the entities
> > > (GA, the community, myself, stefano) disagree.
> > >
> > > I have to point out, that stefano and myself just pass the community
> > > decissions to SPI, so we will not disagree with the community.
> > >
> > > But let us for sake of this rabbit hole, assume, we all disagree.
> > >
> > > I say: green
> > > Stefano says: red
> > > The community says: blue with 90% majority
> > > The GA says: black with 90% majority
> > >
> > > So what will SPI do ?
> > > IMHO, SPI will see me and stefano disagree and consequently will check
> the
> > > public communication channels and see that the community in public and
> > > in a verifyable way has choosen: blue
> >
> > What is the 'community' in this scenario? Who are the members (and who
> > decides), what is the voting mechanism, who is/are the adjudicators?
>
> Thats another deep rabbit hole ...
>
> Also, its not one scenario.
>
> Some examples:
> Has there been a governance attack?
> If yes, whatever rules we have had, would have failed.
>
> Or where peoples systems compromised to produce these disagreements.
> If so, the vote needs to be redone, after things are cleaned up.
>
> Or has the community split in N groups fundamentally disagreeing?
> In this case really we would need to talk and bring people back together.
>
> Or is the disagreement maybe about a meaningless bikeshed question, in
> which case maybe we can simply do without an awnser.
>
> So maybe the question, What is the 'community' in such a extreem case is
> often
> not the right question.
> But technically, if this question must be awnsered, SPI has to decide in
> such
> an extreem case.
>

Quick translation from insane paranoia speak to English:

Governance attack = People who don't agree with Michael.

When the community disagrees with Michael like with SDR, it's the community
that's wrong.

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org