Re: LoMuS

[address@hidden]

On 28 avr. 2012, at 10:13, Graham Percival wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:01:27AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
>> On 28 avr. 2012, at 09:15, Graham Percival wrote:
>> 
>>> So... you *don't* want to set a precedent; you just want a quick
>>> answer about this specific case?  I guess the general consensus is
>>> "go ahead and we'll figure it out later".
>>> 
>> 
>> I *do* want this to work so well that it sets a solid precedent,
> 
> If this is going to set a precedent, then I will say "Do not
> submit LilyPond to LoMuS".  I'm willing to go along with the
> current consensus only if there is the understanding that it does
> *not* set a precedent.

What's wrong with the below being a precedent?  It seems like a good idea that 
people have already rallied around in practice.

> 
>> I get the sense in a way that the precedent has already been set - if 
>> someone sees a cool opportunity (GSoC, LoMuS, whatever), email the list to 
>> call dibs if dibs must be called, make sure no one is opposed, apply, and do 
>> something fair with the money if money is to be gotten.  In the GSoC case, 
>> Janek has $500 that he'll be donating to the organization in whatever way he 
>> sees fit.
> 
> That is not what happened.  Google is paying Janek $4500 directly.
> Carl is getting $500 for the project, which I guess he will spend
> how he sees fit.

Irrespective of who gets the $500, it is the exact same principle as Lomus.  
Someone gets money meant for the organization and they can do with it as they 
see fit, which is what I'm suggesting above.

It's actually a moot point w/ respect to precedent - I have a feeling that 
irrespective of what we call it (precedent, standard operating procedure, 
informal exchange of e-mails), what I suggest above is what will happen.  The 
advantage of calling it a precedent is that we can write it up and put it in 
the CG so that newbs and first-time contributors feel empowered and encouraged 
to do this sorta thing instead of shying away because there's no history of it. 
 However, I definitely don't want Lomus to get held up by the "P" word - I'm 
comfortable with saying that it is setting a simple "Schmrecedent", where 
"Schmrecedent" is defined as something that is not a precedent but could 
eventually be.

Cheers,
MS