COI: non-PLC/Conservancy people and software development contract drafting (was Re: Conflict of Interest policy, 1 March 2012 draft)

[Bradley M. Kuhn]

> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 06:24:20PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>> if a PLC Person [...] wish[es] to be considered a candidate to fulfill
>> the funded software development contract, that PLC Person has a conflict
>> of interest and must recuse herself or himself from the proposal drafting
>> process

Ian Lynagh wrote at 21:41 (EST) on Thursday:
> Can a non-PLC person help put together the draft?

I don't think this should be any problem in the general case.  The PLC
is putting the draft together, and has authority to decide what it
says, and will ultimately vote on it *without* the non-PLC person being
involved.  (Conservancy than has various stop-gap measures on the proposal
after that, but that's orthognal to this point here.)

The PLC should of course feel welcome to take input from anyone who
would be helpful to make a good draft.  *But*, folks who get involved
need to be aware of how that interacts with other parts of the COI
policy.

> If so, can that non-PLC person apply to do the proposed task?

Yes, that question is one of two prongs of problems that might come up.
To address that one you raised specifically first:

I think this isn't really a problem, unless the PLC members themselves
have a conflict.  Specifically, if the PLC members are somehow taking
undue influence from this non-PLC person to have them "cook up a
proposal" that can only be satisfied by some specific non-PLC person,
then that PLC Person probably has a conflict.

To some extent, we have to trust the PLC Members to identify conflicts
and read the policy broadly and err on the side of caution.

For example, while the policy specifically says "family members", if you
really want a good friend to ultimately get a contract, that's, IMO, as
much a conflict as if it were a family member -- and you should raise
that as a conflict.


Now, on the other side of this, there's the issue of some non-PLC person
who wants to *fund* a particular task and influence the work to be
written up in a way that benefits them.  The following part of the COI
policy is meant to address that:

  * *Community Members Cannot Direct Funds.* Community Members are free
  to offer suggestions and engage in open dialogue with PLC, key
  developers regarding a Project's technical direction. However, each
  PLC and Conservancy must together maintain sole and final control over
  that Project's technical direction and charitable mission. Community
  Members who make financial donations do not receive any additional
  control over a Project's technical direction beyond what is available
  to other vocal, active, and contributing community members.

> Also, it seems not impossible that between policy writing starting and
> the vote being made (which could perhaps be of the order of months),
> that a PLC person may gain a conflict of interest (e.g. be hired by a
> company that may want to bid on the proposal).

The important thing is to raise the conflict when it arises and follow
the policy when it does.  Tony and I will of course be available to help
in "real world" situations where this comes up.


I therefore don't think this particular issue requires a change to the
COI.  Ian, do you agree?  Do my answers above address your questions?
-- 
Bradley M. Kuhn, Executive Director, Software Freedom Conservancy