Exploring the possibility of better NPO support in LedgerSMB

[Bradley M. Kuhn]

Chris Travers wrote at 21:22 (EDT) on Tuesday:
> First, I have no intention of doing the Conservancy's evaluation work
> for you.  If I gave you that impression, I sincerely apologize.

There's no need to apologize, and I didn't think you'd suggested that.

> Just a couple clarifications then, if once we are on the same page
> what a "self evaluation" is there for, you still don't think it would
> be helpful, we'll put together more general documentation and provide
> a pointer to it.

Obviously I expect we'll look at any document you prepare.  As I
mentioned elsewhere on this list, Conservancy isn't ready to begin our
work, in part because we're focused on fundraising, so I don't think
we'll be able to look at anything in detail yet.


> I further recognize the danger of appearing partial and I would
> suggest actually inviting various open source candidates to provide
> self evaluations.

This is an interesting idea.  My first thought would be that it is
somewhat presumptuous -- in the sense that: "Who is Conservancy to
dictate to these projects what types of orgs they should support?"

OTOH, it could save us effort, and it would be interesting to compare
how the project sees itself vs. how someone new to the project sees it.

Chris, is your thought that the same questions would be asked both on
the self-evaluation and the one done by Conservancy, or should they be
different?  How would they differ?

-- 
Bradley M. Kuhn, Executive Director, Software Freedom Conservancy