svnpenn

[gratipay-bot]

https://gratipay.com/svnpenn/

(This application will remain open for at least a week.)

[chadwhitacre]

Thanks for the application, @svnpenn! We have two options here: your application is gonna need some work to pass muster according to our current review process. We can work with you on that. The other option is to wait for the outcome of gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432, wherein it looks like we'll be relaxing our review procedures somewhat.

[chadwhitacre]

At a start, what is the product or service you're offering? bm?

[chadwhitacre]

(We'll need that even post-gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432.)

[ghost]

@whit537 I dont really understand your platform. I have several repositories, so I would rather have a team for "me" rather than a team for each repository, especially considering that I have to wait 2 weeks to approve each team? Compare this to Bountysource where you can sign up immediately

[chadwhitacre]

@svnpenn Sorry the platform is confusing. A Team on Gratipay that offers multiple products is fine, but currently we require Teams to offer open work, meaning that others can proactively initiate a work relationship with your Team without your explicit permission. That's what the onboarding and to-do URLs are for. Since you're using GitHub these URLs would generally be a CONTRIBUTING.md and an Issues link, respectively.

On gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432 we're looking at loosening things up so you don't have to have onboarding and to-do URLs, but right now you do. So either we need to come up with more appropriate URLs for those in your case, or we need to wait for gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432 to play out.

That said, there's a prior problem in that there are no licenses specified in any of your repos, which means that your products themselves don't qualify as open (which is a prerequisite to open work as we understand it). Please see:

https://help.github.com/articles/open-source-licensing/#what-happens-if-i-dont-choose-a-license
http://choosealicense.com/
http://www.addalicense.com/

especially considering that I have to wait 2 weeks to approve each team? Compare this to Bountysource where you can sign up immediately

We went through a long and difficult learning curve that led us to our current policies around community curation. See gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#118 and gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#319 for backstory. We observe a minimum of one week to leave time for community input, though we've started to look at subteams as a way to streamline the Team review process.

[chadwhitacre]

How about a post on http://svnpenn.github.io/ about how to get involved with your projects? And then this for a to-do URL?

https://github.com/search?q=user%3Asvnpenn+is%3Aopen&type=Issues

I'd also like to see a better intro paragraph on https://gratipay.com/svnpenn/ instead of just the link to your GitHub profile again.

[ghost]

@whit537 you are asking a bit. I will oblige but let me ask me own:

You want all this stuff, yet your readme at http://github.com/gratipay/team-review is embarassingly terse. You should have examples there of people "doing it right". For example, I would like to see a gratipay team like my own, one that is based on a GitHub user rather than a repo. I see no example of that anywhere here, not even a wiki on this repo. This seems like it could be a pretty common use case

[chadwhitacre]

let me ask me own

By all means! :-)

yet your readme at http://github.com/gratipay/team-review is embarassingly terse

Interesting. I never look there, but it's certainly reasonable to. I'm not sure we want to maintain extensive documentation in the README, but it should more helpfully direct folks to where we do have more extensive documentation. I've attempted this in 8bb836f.

You should have examples there of people "doing it right". For example, I would like to see a gratipay team like my own, one that is based on a GitHub user rather than a repo. I see no example of that anywhere here, not even a wiki on this repo. This seems like it could be a pretty common use case

Have you skimmed through the approved Teams on the homepage to see if there are any there that are relevant to you? I admit it's a bit unwieldy at the moment, but rather than maintaining a separate list of "good" applications, I think the long-term answer is add better discoverability features to Gratipay so that you are empowered to determine for yourself which approved Teams are similar to yours.

For example, I would like to see a gratipay team like my own, one that is based on a GitHub user

Taking you to mean not a GitHub organization, then yes, this is turning out to be a common use case, and we haven't been handling it well. See #82 for some initial work on this, and gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432 for the current state of the conversation. If you'd prefer not to jump through our hoops of posting an onboarding document and listing a to-do URL, then you could wait for gratipay/inside.gratipay.com#432 to land.

Sorry again for the confusion as we streamline our product and our review process.

[mattbk]

@svnpenn, we've finally worked out new Terms of Service. Please read through. Your project profile shows that donations to you are going to support work listed at https://github.com/svnpenn, so I am approving. Welcome to Gratipay!