[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 3/3] doc: add spi.txt

[Stefano Sabatini]

On date Wednesday 2023-10-11 20:10:15 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> This explains how to request refunds and what can be funded by SPI
> ---
>  doc/spi.txt | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 doc/spi.txt
> 
> diff --git a/doc/spi.txt b/doc/spi.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..7d85de8f09
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/doc/spi.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@

Add a short introduction about SPI here.

SPI (Software in the Public Interest) 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. For
details check here:
https://www.spi-inc.org/

FFmpeg is an SPI associated project and donations can be collected and
handled by SPI on behalf of FFmpeg. For details about the association
check here:
https://www.spi-inc.org/projects/ffmpeg/


> +How to request refunds from SPI:
> +--------------------------------
 > +Send a mail to ffmpeg-devel with [REFUND-REQUEST] in the subject

Expanding on this:

Send a mail to ffmpeg-devel with the [REFUND-REQUEST] tag and a short
description of the refund topic in the subject.

In the mail, you also need to provide the amount to be refunded, with
a short description of how the money was spent.

There is no need and is not recommeded to send receipts when sending
the refund request on the ffmpeg-devel mailing-list, but they are
usually needed later when the request is approved and the refund
request is sent to SPI:
https://www.spi-inc.org/treasurer/reimbursement-form/

> +
> +
> +What can be payed by SPI:
> +-------------------------

> +FFmpeg money collected at SPI can be used for any purpose which is OK by

OK => fine/compliant/in line with

> +501(c)3 nonprofit rules, and within our mission (Free & OSS software).
> +
> +In practice we frequently payed for Travel and Hardware.

> +For other things, it is recommanded to disscuss them beforehand

recommended .. to discuss

> +on ffmpeg-devel and if the community agrees to fund them, also with
> +SPI through stefano before starting with anything.

My take on this:

For other refund expenses or sponsorships, it is recommended to
discuss them beforehand on ffmpeg-devel. If there is a community
agreement on their approval, the current FFmpeg liaison will followup
to get an approval on the SPI side.

> +
> +
> +Is it possible to fund active development by SPI:
> +(the texts below have been taken from multiple
> + replies FFmpeg has received from SPI, they have been edited
> + so that "I" was replaced by "SPI" in some cases.)
> +-------------------------------------------------
> +Paying for development *does* require substantial

> +additional paperwork, but it is not prohibitied.

prohibited

> +

> +Several SPI projects pay contractors for development
> +efforts.  SPI needs a contract in place which describes the work to be
> +done.  There are also various things SPI needs to check (e.g. are they a
> +US person or not, as with GSoC mentor payments; are they really a
> +contractor and not a employee).
> +
> +SPI can't deal with employment at the moment because that involves a
> +lot of work, like health insurance, tax withholding, etc.  Contractors
> +are easier because they have to take care of that themselves; Whether
> +someone is a contractor vs employee depends on various factors (that
> +of course are different in every country) and can be disputed (see
> +e.g. the debate about whether Uber drivers are employees); SPI has a
> +questionnaire about their circumstances.)
> +
> +Unfortunately, there's no one-size-fits all when dealing with contractors.
> +As already mentioned, without knowing the contributor's country
> +
> +SPI does have templates, but they depend on the contractors country. If it's
> +US, Australia, France and a couple others SPI could provide them next day,
> +otherwise SPI would need to ask their attorney to draft one, which would
> +take some time
> +
> +Also, SPI has two models, MSA (which transfers ownership) and CSA (which
> +grants a license instead). SPI usually sends the MSA (it's better for most
> +purposes), but for development purposes, some projects prefer that the
> +contractor retain ownership rights.

This part is a useful resume of the past internal discussions, but at
the same time we never really went down to this road, so I'm not sure
moving this to the repo would be helpful from the operational point of
view. It's probably useful to clarify the current status quo with the
other developers though.

About the placement of the text, given that this is an internal memo
intended for developers probably it's better to keep it in the ffmpeg
repo rather than on the web one (as it was proposed in another reply).