Nathan Torkington [firstname.lastname@example.org] quoth:
*>Elaine -HFB- Ashton writes:
*>> I would hope the Perl community would revolt if anyone tried this with
*>You haven't been paying attention! Bill Gates has already been
*>channeling his money through the ActiveState "front" into Perl,
*>buying influence in an effort to turn Perl into a large festering
*>patch pile. Tim O'Reilly has Larry Wall in some kind of mesmeric
*>trance, and is busily cashing in on Perl as fast as we poor schmucks
*>can write the checks!
Well, a consortium is far far different than a foundation or an outright
*show me da money* corporation.
*>The future is here baby, and it's green! Perl stands for PERL EQUALS
*>REAL LUCRE, and Dick Hardt and Tim O'Reilly are the first in line with
*>their hands in our pockets MAKING MONEY OFF OUR HARD LABOUR! These
Hmm..well, Dick _does_ drive a gorgeous Porsche Boxster...:)
*>know what we do with them! We CRUSH them between our fingernails
*>and FEAST ON THEIR BLOODY INSIDES!
Don't forget the fava beans and chianti darling!
*>So ok, good examples are hard to come by. But they must be bad
*>because everyone hates them! So let's burn the buggers anyway!
*sigh* No, this wasn't my point. An organisation that is restricting
gifts, *large* gifts, to corporations for the purpose of R&D is, well, not
the best way to go. Consortia are generally groups of corporations with a
common interest, in this case it would be python. This is not a charitable
organisation. Obviously, these companies will have more influence than
others in the development of python. It is somewhat like calling a hooker
and 'escort', it's the same deal only a nicer name.
I'm not opposed to corporate interest, but I don't like it when instead of
going python.com, they go this route and still solicit $60 or more from
the 'individual' contributor. Why would the little guy feel like he should
give $0.05 to a group that is getting $25k+ at a whack?
Perl has a definite community, one far different than any other I've seen.
If this were tried I think it would alienate a large number of people who
do contribute and who would like to but don't know how. Individual
contributions build community and personal investment, which can be as
important as the gift itself.
Take all the money you want from *.com, but make sure it is an
unrestricted gift. I don't see anything on that site that would make me
believe that it is a 501(c)(3). Companies don't give money away for warm
fuzzies and a pat on the back if it isn't tax-deductible.
I think it is tacky. Of course, if you can find a serious argument, POV or
philosophy that might make me rethink that, I'm always up for being shown
the error of my ways.