Am 01.06.22 um 11:11 schrieb Jan Holesovsky:
Andreas Mantke píše v Út 31. 05. 2022 v 19:49 +0200:
I'd be curious to know what would be (from the point of TDF's mission
statutes) the difference between working on the source code by in-
developers and by tendering and paying a commercial company for doing
I only could see the difference that in one case TDF has full control
and has not to pay for the benefit of a commercial company. And thus
the first case could get reach more targets / tickets done than in
latter case from my point of view.
The difference is that once you hire a developer / developers, the
development becomes a mandatory expense - TDF has to pay their wage
every month. Also when TDF switches targets, it has to pay for the
time the developers have to spend learning the new area.
On the other hand, the tendering is (and always has been) only budgeted
from the excess, as the last thing after all the other costs (staff,
marketing, infrastructure, etc. etc.) are covered - which gives TDF
much more freedom in the planning: it can decide not to tender at all,
if all the other costs give no room for that (and avoid hard decisions
where to cut - infrastructure? conference? or even jobs?).
I'm not sure if you're really thinking such simply or if you try to
throw smoke grenades further.
It seemed you try to create the impression that a contract of an
in-house-developer is always for livelong and thus a big mandatory
expense for a very long time. But I think you as the general manager of
a commercial company should know better (?).
The management of in-house developer is more lean and direct.
Instead if you tender the development tasks you have to publish and
advertise the tender, evaluate the bids, evaluate the milestones and the
result(s). This is whole process consumes a lot of work time from TDF
staff, board members and/or volunteers, which will be lacking in other
important areas of the TDF/LibreOffice project then. Because a
commercial company has to calculate in unforeseeable problems and
realize a profit, the price for a tender is much higher. In addition the
number of commercial companies, able to work on such LibreOffice source
code tenders, is - spoken guarded - very clearly laid out. If we would
see such 'diversity' outside of the TDF world we would name it a
monopoly/oligopoly market and wouldn't expect a real competion.
Over all I think the above answer shows that the role of a general
manager of a commercial company, which has some interest in TDF
tendering development, has a huge CoI with the TDF role(s). Thus I'd
expect that this CoI should be solved asap and the appropriate measures
taken to prevent TDF from further damage.
## Free Software Advocate
## Plone add-on developer
## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
- Re: [board-discuss] Merged proposal for in-house developers at TDF (continued)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy