Re: SPI using Google Apps?

I was wondering whether SPI, or an SPI-associated project is using Google Apps, i.e., has a Google Apps account, and if so, whether it's a Google Apps for Non-Profits account.

The reason I'm asking is that Google Apps for Non-Profts allows up to 3000 users at no cost, rather than 10 for an individual or "small business" account. However, there are stringent requirements to qualify as a non-profit [1], including having to be 501(c)3 certified. SPI obviously is, though my (admittedly limited) understanding is that its associated projects are not per se (or are they?). Google for Non-profits does have a clause for accommodating "branches" of "umbrella organizations" that "use a common EIN" [2]. I'm wondering whether this would indeed cover SPI-associated projects. (And to do so, SPI would presumably have to have a Google Apps account to start with, at least based on my reading of [2].)

Any information or input on this appreciated.

-hilmar

[1] http://www.google.com/nonprofits/join/ then scroll to "Are you eligible for Google for Nonprofits"
[2] http://support.google.com/nonprofits/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1699858

--
===========================================================
: Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- hlapp at drycafe dot net :
===========================================================

On 10/12/12 2:04 PM, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> I was wondering whether SPI, or an SPI-associated project is using
> Google Apps, i.e., has a Google Apps account, and if so, whether it's
> a Google Apps for Non-Profits account.

Well, since SPI as an organization is dedicated to promoting Free
Software, you'd want to make the case that there simply isn't any Free
Software which fulfills the features you want out of Google Apps. Note
that the non-profit account only allows the use of a single domain, AFAIK.

People have made similar cases for purchasing licenses for other things
in the past.

At this point, we don't have an account simply because nobody has asked
for one.

--Josh Berkus

Hi Hilmar,

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 05:04:18PM -0400, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> I was wondering whether SPI, or an SPI-associated project is using Google
> Apps, i.e., has a Google Apps account, and if so, whether it's a Google Apps
> for Non-Profits account.

Since I'm currently employed by Google as my day job, I'm going to limit my
participation in this thread and any resulting decisions.

However, I will provide several current-status facts:

* SPI doesn't currently use Google Apps directly or offer our projects a
pre-existing relationship with Google Apps, nor has it
signed up in any way with Google for Nonprofits.
* SPI doesn't forbid SPI-associated projects from using Google Apps, whether
paid with their project's SPI-held funds, with other funds, or at a free tier.
* Some associated projects might use it already, but my quick spot-check of a
few projects' MX servers didn't any pointed at Google.
* When SPI is making software decisions, it generally prefers free software.
* SPI-associated projects are not strictly speaking "part" of SPI, nor are they
acting on SPI's behalf or as SPI's agent. SPI is providing fiscal sponsorship
services to the projects under certain terms, but they remain independent
nonprofit unincorporated associations.
* Our projects are free to work with other fiscal sponsors in addition to SPI,
and some do. They can and do also act as individuals.
* When SPI does something in its role as a project's fiscal sponsor, SPI's
501(c)(3) status and EIN are relevant to that.
* When a project acts other than via SPI, SPI's 501(c)(3) status and EIN are
irrelevant.

I'll leave all the subjective aspects of this thread to others.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org

Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.

At any rate, what prompted the query to start with is that OBF runs mailman lists (and MediaWiki wikis, but Google Apps wouldn't do anything about those) on hardware and OS versions that are highly outdated and thus cause pain and vulnerability. Also, we receive a lot of spam. Keeping on top of that through moderation, even with spamassassin and stuff, has been too painful for a while, so we're looking for alternatives. Google Apps obviously isn't a solve all for this, so my query was mostly informational. So I'm at least as curious about how other SPI projects fill these needs, and whether SPI runs any infrastructure for common use by its associated projects. (I realize I should have put that in a new thread.)

-hilmar

Sent with a tap.

On Oct 12, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:

> Hi Hilmar,
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 05:04:18PM -0400, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>> I was wondering whether SPI, or an SPI-associated project is using Google
>> Apps, i.e., has a Google Apps account, and if so, whether it's a Google Apps
>> for Non-Profits account.
>
> Since I'm currently employed by Google as my day job, I'm going to limit my
> participation in this thread and any resulting decisions.
>
> However, I will provide several current-status facts:
>
> * SPI doesn't currently use Google Apps directly or offer our projects a
> pre-existing relationship with Google Apps, nor has it
> signed up in any way with Google for Nonprofits.
> * SPI doesn't forbid SPI-associated projects from using Google Apps, whether
> paid with their project's SPI-held funds, with other funds, or at a free tier.
> * Some associated projects might use it already, but my quick spot-check of a
> few projects' MX servers didn't any pointed at Google.
> * When SPI is making software decisions, it generally prefers free software.
> * SPI-associated projects are not strictly speaking "part" of SPI, nor are they
> acting on SPI's behalf or as SPI's agent. SPI is providing fiscal sponsorship
> services to the projects under certain terms, but they remain independent
> nonprofit unincorporated associations.
> * Our projects are free to work with other fiscal sponsors in addition to SPI,
> and some do. They can and do also act as individuals.
> * When SPI does something in its role as a project's fiscal sponsor, SPI's
> 501(c)(3) status and EIN are relevant to that.
> * When a project acts other than via SPI, SPI's 501(c)(3) status and EIN are
> irrelevant.
>
> I'll leave all the subjective aspects of this thread to others.
>
> - Jimmy Kaplowitz
> jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org

On 10/26/12 6:45 PM, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.
>
> At any rate, what prompted the query to start with is that OBF runs mailman lists (and MediaWiki wikis, but Google Apps wouldn't do anything about those) on hardware and OS versions that are highly outdated and thus cause pain and vulnerability. Also, we receive a lot of spam. Keeping on top of that through moderation, even with spamassassin and stuff, has been too painful for a while, so we're looking for alternatives. Google Apps obviously isn't a solve all for this, so my query was mostly informational. So I'm at least as curious about how other SPI projects fill these needs, and whether SPI runs any infrastructure for common use by its associated projects. (I realize I should have put that in a new thread.)

Open Source Labs hosts free mailman lists for open source projects. I'd
go there first.

--Josh Berkus

On 10/26/2012 01:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> On 10/26/12 6:45 PM, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>> Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.

Not only do the directly financially sponsor open source, they have open
sourced quite a few tools themselves.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC
@cmdpromptinc - 509-416-6579

Does anyone here have experience with the spam control at Open Source Labs? In our experience mailman isn't workable with lots of spam ending up in the moderation queues - the UI isn't made for that.

And thanks for the OSL reminder - they've been on our mind before.

-hilmar

Sent with a tap.

On Oct 26, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:

> On 10/26/12 6:45 PM, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>> Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.
>>
>> At any rate, what prompted the query to start with is that OBF runs mailman lists (and MediaWiki wikis, but Google Apps wouldn't do anything about those) on hardware and OS versions that are highly outdated and thus cause pain and vulnerability. Also, we receive a lot of spam. Keeping on top of that through moderation, even with spamassassin and stuff, has been too painful for a while, so we're looking for alternatives. Google Apps obviously isn't a solve all for this, so my query was mostly informational. So I'm at least as curious about how other SPI projects fill these needs, and whether SPI runs any infrastructure for common use by its associated projects. (I realize I should have put that in a new thread.)
>
> Open Source Labs hosts free mailman lists for open source projects. I'd
> go there first.
>
> --Josh Berkus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general

Hilmar Lapp <hlapp(at)drycafe(dot)net> wrote:

> Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full
> agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when
> there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair
> amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't
> exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.

Microsoft invests a fair amount of money in free software as well ...

Anyway, my impression (I didn't count) is that while most of the projects
associated with SPI are committed to producing free software, they make no
claims about preferring free software to do so.

As long as the individual project has no policy against using
proprietary software controlled by Google, I don't see the problem.

Fabian

On 10/27/2012 09:25 AM, Fabian Keil wrote:
>> Apologies for the silence. To not leave this hanging, I'm in full
>> agreement with the argument of preferring open-source software when
>> there is a choice to be made. Though in fairness, Google invests a fair
>> amount of money into open-source, and so using Google products isn't
>> exactly inconsistent (IMHO) with an open source commitment.
> Microsoft invests a fair amount of money in free software as well ...

Yes. They do.

Joshua D. Drake

On 13011 March 1977, Hilmar Lapp wrote:

> query was mostly informational. So I'm at least as curious about how
> other SPI projects fill these needs,

Depends on the size of the project. Take Debian -> runs it on its
own. Take a small(er) one and you might find it uses lots of "other
places" to have their stuff.

> and whether SPI runs any infrastructure for common use by its
> associated projects. (I realize I should have put that in a new
> thread.)

Yes, SPI does. The most common is DNS, though we also host
stuff for projects like lists, mail, web. If you want that,
admin(at)spi-inc(dot)org is your contact.

--
bye, Joerg
<exa> There is no point in trying to fix bugs if I won't have an
account. Sorry.

> As long as the individual project has no policy against using
> proprietary software controlled by Google, I don't see the problem.

Well, the discussion was getting a Google Apps account for SPI in
general, rather than for a specific project. So I think for things
which SPI is doing as an umbrella organization, the "free software" test
still applies. Of course, I'm not on the Board. ;-)

There is a more substantial technical obstacle to Google Apps NPO
subscription: it is limited to a single domain and a single
administrator. So all projects who use an SPI-based subscription to
Google Apps would be using @spi-inc.org, and SPI IT staff would need to
control accounts. This is not prohibitive, just be aware of it.

Anyway, from the sound of it, OBF doesn't need anything which OSL or our
existing IT infrastructure can't provide ... using entirely free software.

--Josh Berkus

Joerg Jaspert <joerg(at)debian(dot)org> wrote:

> On 13011 March 1977, Hilmar Lapp wrote:

> > and whether SPI runs any infrastructure for common use by its
> > associated projects. (I realize I should have put that in a new
> > thread.)
>
> Yes, SPI does. The most common is DNS, though we also host
> stuff for projects like lists, mail, web. If you want that,
> admin(at)spi-inc(dot)org is your contact.

As mentioned before, it would be great if the services SPI
already provides for projects were documented on the website.

Fabian

Fabian Keil <fk(at)fabiankeil(dot)de> writes:

> As mentioned before, it would be great if the services SPI
> already provides for projects were documented on the website.

Thanks, I agree that this is a great idea. Would you like to help out
by starting such a page?

The spi-inc.org web site is an ikiwiki instance backed by git... so it
should be really easy for anyone who wants to help us out to do so:

http://git.spi-inc.org/gitweb/?p=website.git;a=summary

Several board members are routine contributors to the site content and
would happily respond to git pull requests...

Bdale

On Nov 1, 2012, at 8:45 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:

> There is a more substantial technical obstacle to Google Apps NPO subscription: it is limited to a single domain and a single administrator. So all projects who use an SPI-based subscription to Google Apps would be using @spi-inc.org, and SPI IT staff would need to
> control accounts.

I think that's an open question right now - I haven't heard a legally informed opinion (or a verdict from Google) as to whether SPI associated projects would or would not qualify as branches of an SPI umbrella. If they do, then each project can in fact have their own Google Apps account (and thus domain), though in the application one needs to link to the one for the umbrella (at least that's what I understood).

-hilmar
--
===========================================================
: Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- hlapp at drycafe dot net :
===========================================================

On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:52:58AM -0400, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> > There is a more substantial technical obstacle to Google Apps NPO subscription: it is limited to a single domain and a single administrator. So all projects who use an SPI-based subscription to Google Apps would be using @spi-inc.org, and SPI IT staff would need to
> > control accounts.
>
> I think that's an open question right now - I haven't heard a legally informed opinion (or a verdict from Google) as to whether SPI associated projects would or would not qualify as branches of an SPI umbrella. If they do, then each project can in fact have their own Google Apps account (and thus domain), though in the application one needs to link to the one for the umbrella (at least that's what I understood).

I'm not going to pretend to be a lawyer or speculate about whether SPI
associated projects meet Google's criteria for this purpose. However, in
normal, non-Google terminology, SPI-associated projects aren't "part" of SPI in
any way, not even as branches.

Indeed, they can even work with other US or foreign non-profits at the same
time if they so choose, or do some things in their own names as unincorporated
associations. They're separate groups that have entered into a specific
relationship with SPI where SPI can hold assets in trust for them and perform
certain actions on their behalf. Unlike a branch of a company, if an
associated project acts outside of SPI, they can't act in our name or use our
501(c)(3) status for those actions.

Individuals whom SPI-associated projects consider to be their members
automatically qualify for SPI contributing membership, which allows them to
vote and run for the board of directors, as well as on anything else where we
ask our membership to vote. (Many such individuals would qualify for
contributing membership under our guidelines even if this weren't true.) This
is the closest our associated projects come to being "part" of SPI.

Everything I said is rather different for the Software Freedom Conservanancy,
which is a lot closer to the umbrella model. Again, not speaking to what
Google's criteria are here.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org

On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, Bdale Garbee wrote:

> Fabian Keil <fk(at)fabiankeil(dot)de> writes:
>
>> As mentioned before, it would be great if the services SPI
>> already provides for projects were documented on the website.
>
> Thanks, I agree that this is a great idea. Would you like to help out
> by starting such a page?

Actually we already have such a page :)

http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/services/

Cheers,

Rob

--
Director, Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
Email: robert(at)spi-inc(dot)org Linux counter ID #16440
IRC: Solver (OFTC & Freenode)
Web: http://www.spi-inc.org
Free and Open Source: The revolution that quietly changed the world

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Robert Brockway wrote:

> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, Bdale Garbee wrote:
>
>> Fabian Keil <fk(at)fabiankeil(dot)de> writes:
>>
>>> As mentioned before, it would be great if the services SPI
>>> already provides for projects were documented on the website.
>>
>> Thanks, I agree that this is a great idea. Would you like to help out
>> by starting such a page?
>
> Actually we already have such a page :)
>
> http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/services/

Having said that, the page is a bit vague on the technical services
offered. Contributions welcome.

I've just updated the main page to include a link to the project services
page.

Cheers,

Rob

--
Director, Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
Email: robert(at)spi-inc(dot)org Linux counter ID #16440
IRC: Solver (OFTC & Freenode)
Web: http://www.spi-inc.org
Free and Open Source: The revolution that quietly changed the world

Robert Brockway <robert(at)spi-inc(dot)org> writes:

>> Actually we already have such a page :)
>>
>> http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/services/
>
> Having said that, the page is a bit vague on the technical services
> offered. Contributions welcome.

Right. A list of the technical services provided and/or available could
very easily end up justifying a new page.

> I've just updated the main page to include a link to the project services
> page.

Good, thanks!

Bdale

Robert Brockway <robert(at)spi-inc(dot)org> wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Robert Brockway wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> >
> >> Fabian Keil <fk(at)fabiankeil(dot)de> writes:
> >>
> >>> As mentioned before, it would be great if the services SPI
> >>> already provides for projects were documented on the website.
> >>
> >> Thanks, I agree that this is a great idea. Would you like to help out
> >> by starting such a page?
> >
> > Actually we already have such a page :)
> >
> > http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/services/
>
> Having said that, the page is a bit vague on the technical services
> offered. Contributions welcome.

Given that I have no insight about what the technical services
provided by SPI really are, to which projects they are provided
and what the conditions are, I don't see how I can contribute here.

My impression is that currently the people who have the missing
information lack the time to write it down.

If I were provided with the required information I could play
ikiwiki markup monkey (after familiarising myself with the syntax),
but I'm not sure that this would really improve the workflow.

Fabian

[Hilmar Lapp]
> In our experience mailman isn't workable with lots of spam ending up
> in the moderation queues - the UI isn't made for that.

The mailman web GUI is not make for it, that is true. But it become a
lot easier to handle by using the command line tool listadmin,
available in Debian as
<URL: http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/listadmin.html >. With it, I
moderate almost 40 lists in less then two minutes every day. :)

--
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen