Re: BSP Reimbursements
TL; DR: The previous process was not entirely automatic as Martin
implied. I'm fine with a slightly better documented version if the
previous process if that's what we want.
>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> writes:
Martin> All this talk about who should handle approvals (DPL or
Martin> organizers) and putting together a budget seems way overkill
Martin> to me. We're talking about $100 per person. The whole idea
Martin> was to make this a painless process. i.e. just send a
Martin> request to a TO and they will process it. No involvement of
Martin> the DPL or organizer needed.
That's not how it worked before.
There was no pre-approval required, but the DPL still had to approve
things for the TOS. What I saw happen reading through the leader
archives is that people would tend to send in a request to Chris
including receipts that he would approve; hopefully the TO was copied to
process once he had approved.
If the TOs are willing to take on the work load, I'd be fine with that.
However, my understanding is that at least for Debian France,
Debian expendatures do require explicit DPL approval by their bylaws.
That's from a discussion during the campaign period this year on
debian-vote.
The process isn't entirely decision free. The $100 wasn't made
available to anyone in the world, but some vaguely worded version of
sufficiently active Debian contributors. so someone needs to see if the
person is a sufficiently active contributor (and I'd prefer more clarity
around what that means). Also, for SPI, you need to make sure the
expenses are reasonable and customary (they are expenses SPI can
reimburse as a non-profit). Other TOs will have similar tax rules.
now, I guess the TOs are used to making that determination and we could
let them do so.
If we document the process and document who is eligible, I'm fine
sending out quick approvals without any pre-approval. I ask that for
anything lacking pre-approval the eligibility involve basically no
judgment calls and be entirely mechanical. For example we could say DDs
and DMs area always approved and other contributors should ask. Ore
something more liberal. I never want to get boxed into the position of
having to approve someone because they have already spent the money when
I don't think that is a good call. Either they are approved because
they meet a mechanical criteria or I get asked at a point where it is
reasonable to say no.
Reply to: