search

StackStorm / community

Async conversation about ideas, planning, roadmap, issues, RFCs, etc around StackStorm
https://stackstorm.com/
Apache License 2.0
8 stars 3 forks source link

TSC Subcommittee Meeting (15 Apr 2021): Partnership Program #73

Closed mickmcgrath13 closed 3 years ago

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

April 2021 @StackStorm/tsc 1 hour meeting will take place on Thursday, 15th Apr 2021, 12:00 PM US Pacific. This event has a video call. Join: https://meet.google.com/tdq-xvwo-mnu (US) +1 650-735-3248 PIN: 128167492# View more phone numbers: https://tel.meet/tdq-xvwo-mnu?pin=2872811864098&hs=7

Purpose

To decide on a partnership program. Many of these discussion topics will have been answered or discussed in other issues (like this one). This issue is meant to aggregate them and start a subcommittee to take them forward.

Goals

Deadline

Final draft by next ST2 TSC meeting

Governance

Anyone can join and contribute ideas.

Led initially by 4 partners:

Rules

FAQ

Should we create/host an FAQ for a 'soft landing' of governance / conflict of interest?

Disputes

In general, consensus for involved parties should be sufficient. If a dispute arises, how are they resolved? This could be:

Mechanics

raviorch commented 3 years ago

Thanks Mick, for creating the issue. Will post here the recommendation that I sent out to the other thread.

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

This one: https://github.com/StackStorm/discussions/issues/72#issuecomment-814239951 ?

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

We should have verbiage to mitigate legal risk from incoming partners in case of possible "bad actors". Maybe something simple along the lines of:

I, as a partner, accept to not hold StackStorm accountable [...]

raviorch commented 3 years ago

Exactly we need incorporate this type of language. I will work with our legal counsel to get this sorted out if necessary.

amanda11 commented 3 years ago

For Ammeon representation I'll be delegating to @elewzey who was also on the call. (I lost my mic half way through...)

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

image

arm4b commented 3 years ago

We should have verbiage to mitigate legal risk from incoming partners in case of possible "bad actors". Maybe something simple along the lines of:

I, as a partner, accept to not hold StackStorm accountable [...]

Here is what LF legal proposed and so it was drafted on the https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ (beta):

In your [partnership email] proposal, please include the following statement:

On behalf of PARTNER NAME ("Participant"), I agree that Participant will comply with the StackStorm Partners Program requirements published at https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ and Linux Foundation Policies published at https://lfprojects.org/policies/, as updated from time to time, during our participation in the Partners Program.

What would be the language to add to that statement? cc @raviorch

raviorch commented 3 years ago

Eugene,

We definitely would like to add verbiage like you mentioned below. In the meantime, you mentioned on the TSC call that you had researched other open source project partnership charters. Can you please provide examples of the same so the subcommittee has a starting point instead of reinventing the wheel. This would really accelerate our progress as other open source projects may have solved most of the issues we are seeing here. Please send this out asap as I will use that to put a draft out before the weekend if that is available.

Ravi

------ Original Message ------ From: "Eugen Cusmaunsa" @.> To: "StackStorm/discussions" @.> Cc: "raviorch" @.>; "Mention" @.> Sent: 4/6/2021 10:43:41 AM Subject: Re: [StackStorm/discussions] Partnership Program Subcommittee (#73)

We should have verbiage to mitigate legal risk from incoming partners in case of possible "bad actors". Maybe something simple along the lines of:

I, as a partner, accept to not hold StackStorm accountable [...]

Here is what LF legal proposed and so it was drafted on the https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ (beta):

In your [partnership] proposal, please include the following statement:

On behalf of PARTNER NAME ("Participant"), I agree that Participant will comply with the StackStorm Partners Program requirements published at https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ and Linux Foundation Policies published at https://lfprojects.org/policies/, as updated from time to time, during our participation in the Partners Program.

What would be the language to add to that statement? cc @raviorch https://github.com/raviorch

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/StackStorm/discussions/issues/73#issuecomment-814308752, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQHYO6U4LQTYYGPZFHXKEDDTHNB43ANCNFSM42PEP2FA.

raviorch commented 3 years ago

Mick, JP, Edwin, please let me know what time is the best for us to meet. I have asked Eugene to provide some examples, in the meantime here are some examples I found:

https://www.mongodb.com/partners/partner-program https://partner.suse.com/English/ SUSE-Application-Process-Final.pdf https://partners.gitlab.com/English/ There a bunch more, but as it clearly states in the GitLab Channel Partner page, https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/resellers/ It talks about what the community provides to the partner first before getting into what the partner should provide, this is the type of language that we should use.

arm4b commented 3 years ago

@raviorch These are good examples. However, you're referring to the projects with the Open Core + Enterprise model. This is what Extreme Networks was before with the EWC. I'd imagine EXTR would absolutely need a complex multi-tier Partners Program with the Legal Agreements, etc, etc as it's a B2B partnership.

This is a very different model compared to how StackStorm 100% Open Source operates under the neutral non-profit LF governance with different values and system behind.

Here is an example for the Debian Open Source Partner program that was a prototype for the https://stackstorm.com/partners/ and https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ drafts.

https://www.debian.org/partners/ https://www.debian.org/partners/2021/partners

In short, they want to highlight orgs by providing recognition (listing on the page) as "official partner" for those significantly helping the project. StackStorm can go further and provide co-marketing opportunities (examples at RFC: StackStorm Partners, Code of Conduct and Economy #51.

Similar to Debian, do you think we would be able to focus on simplicity and maintenance-free keeping in mind the Open Source community interests?

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Meeting

@raviorch I can meet for either of the following

Benefits

@raviorch All of the links you posted (mongo, suse, gitlab) clearly display benefits of becoming a partner (to @punkrokk's point), and I think we should outline similar benefits. @armab's proposal does have a section for it already. It mostly speaks to 2 things:

Also, I like the table presentation in the mongo partners page: image

GitLab has a similar one: image

Possible Tasks

Language

Mongo, gitlab, and debian, do not seem to provide language to the effect of "we'll not hold the project accountable" (if they do, it's not obvious).
Suse might, but you'd have to go through the partner registration to get the terms and conditions pdf (it might be available elsewhere, but I haven't had a chance to look).

The partners code of conduct says a lot (esp. the conflict of interest), but I think it lacks one thing that was discussed during the TSC meeting which is: simple, visible language to say "don't sue ST2, yo".

@armab, the language in the proposed draft also doesn't seem to convey that message (don't sue st2).

I think the key point here is that I, as not a lawyer, don't see anything that explicitly states that ST2 won't be liable. It's possible it's buried in the verbiage somewhere, but without being well versed in legal-ese, it's not clear, and I suspect that the same will be true for others, so clear, concise language might be helpful?

Possible Tasks

elewzey commented 3 years ago

@raviorch

Thursday, April 15 at 3 PM Eastern would work for me

vivekorch commented 3 years ago

Thanks @mickmcgrath13. I will join the meeting with Ravi.

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Invites sent! Let me know if you did not receive them.

arm4b commented 3 years ago

Should we just include a simple message (either to the partners page or to the submission request) to say that the applying partner agrees not to hold ST2 accountable?

Perhaps then we could merge what the LF recommended to us with the proposed "non-accountable" wording:

In your [partnership email] proposal, please include the following statement:

On behalf of PARTNER NAME ("Participant"), I agree that Participant will comply with the StackStorm Partners Program requirements published at https://stackstorm.com/partners-program/ and Linux Foundation Policies published at https://lfprojects.org/policies/, as updated from time to time, and agree to not hold StackStorm liable for any damages or loss during or after our participation in the Partners Program.

blag commented 3 years ago

@mickmcgrath13 Can you retitle this issue with the date of the meeting and update the issue description? See #74, #75, and #76 for examples.

I haven't received an invite, but we should be publicly announcing these meetings anyway.

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

2021-04-15 - Meeting notes

Discussion about Ravi's proposal

Screenshared the proposal.. Ravi will upload/share

Liability/Indemnification discussion

Main goal is to remove liability from partners to stackstorm.

Just include: "partner agrees StackStorm liable"

Outcome: in the email they send which will be outlined in the landing page Mutual indemnification clause will be a case-by-case basis

Common partner contributions

Types of contributions that can be made. Goal is for partners to be labeled for their core competencies so that the public can evaluate who to come to (properly communicated on the StackStorm page).

Opportunities for badges?

Recommendation: Badges based on categories of expertise.

Should add a note that a more structured partner program will come after a certain threshold of partners exist. Threshold TBD.

What can stackstorm give back to partners

Really the only way today is to highlight the partners as well as mutual promotion (blogs, webinars, etc).

Next Steps

Video Recording

https://drive.google.com/file/d/179qnP_s0Y3AGTLdUIj_-_twds9fx66mp/view

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Partners program draft doc by @raviorch : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1x4-9cX-hrvogrSoLc2FE63BH91dUGN9E

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

..also, I did record the call. I'll link it here as soon as I can find where it went :P

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

@raviorch fyi: i updated the doc so that anyone can comment but only some can edit

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Here's the recording of the meeting from 2021-04-15: https://drive.google.com/file/d/179qnP_s0Y3AGTLdUIj_-_twds9fx66mp/view

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

There have been several comments/suggestions to the doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EVD3efr_cJ-amHyHfDBtMZXmLTFpb4-I/edit

I think most could be simply resolved (cc @raviorch ). I'm happy to do it :)

There are some that will require further discussion, though

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

All changes from the doc have been updated in the draft

Next Steps

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Define labels (table headers or table cells?)

We've generally decided that the labels will be based on the table headers. I've set up some common symbols to be able to be re-used and added as labels per entry in the partners page: https://stackstorm.com/partners/

Example: image

Next steps:

arm4b commented 3 years ago

Just discussed it in the TSC the screenshot/sketch. This is very helpful to get a visible idea of it, thanks a lot @mickmcgrath13 !

A few comments:

See: st2-labels-sketch_refined

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

@armab I agree the large labels are a bit much. Icons with tooltips are doable and gives the best of both worlds.

Placing icons beside the partner name is tricky with the thrive architect, so below the name would be easier. We can do icons below easily with a tooltip: image

with tooltip: image

Also, I'm not sure I understand this:

Based on discussions we had, some partners expressed the fact they don't want to be associated with the pre-defined explicit written labeling like that.

and this:

If we'll label PackageCloud, CloudSmith, AWS which provide hosting/infrastructure and associate them with the Business Development label, - it's irrelevant and confusing not just for some partners but also users.

are we going with the 4 icons which are currently the headers of the table in the draft page? if not, what all labels/icons do we need? Currently, we have: image

If this is not what we want for the labels, please recommend a list of labels (and associated icons). IMO, these 4 'categories' should be sufficient until such time as a partner says "i'd like something different"

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

also, fyi, to add the labels, do the following:

arm4b commented 3 years ago

:100: That would work! :+1: @mickmcgrath13

Or even switching from Thrive Architect to raw HTML for that page is OK too to make the icons inline.

After all, we used the tool to get this page initially working and with a stable Partners version we won't need to implement anything new. Just edit old partners and add new ones.

Eventually, it'll be static HTML anyways as we migrate out from the WordPress.

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

I went down the plain HTML route before, and it didn't seem quite as straight-forward as I had hoped.

I found a way to get the icons beside the partner with Thrive, anyway:

It's also helpful to make use of the copy functionality as it copies all the preset settings from the module that is copied.

Here's an example: image image

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Official Vote here: https://github.com/StackStorm/discussions/issues/80

mickmcgrath13 commented 3 years ago

Closing as all the pages are live!