Commercial support

[Tom Wickline]

On 5/7/05, Shachar Shemesh <wine-devel at shemesh.biz> wrote:
> Before going into elaborate schemes here, I suggest that everyone
> consider the following points:
> 1. Sure, commercial companies have something to gain from being listed
> on the WineHQ page, but so does Wine.

So this is a mute point.

> 2. If I, as a business owner, am going to be charged more than a token
> amount, I had better get a receipt.

You should save all your small receipt's they will add up come tax time.

 Otherwise the actual cost to me is
> about double the amount I pay Wine. I don't mind if it's 50$ or 100$,
> but more then that, and I'd want it as a deductible expense. As Wine is
> not a legally existing body, however, there is no one to issue said receipt.

The "Wine Party Fund" is listed as a non-profit charity in the state
of Minnesota
so the listing fee could be a minimum donation to this fund. and as
its a non-profit you should have the ability to write this off.

> 3. On the flip side, if Wine is going to be receiving such amounts, it
> will have to report them to some tax authority. Who will do the
> reporting, and how?

WPF is a non-profit...

> 4. If we are going to go into 8 steps programs, a contract had better be
> involved. Creating one costs money. Keeping it enforced costs money.
> This money, a.k.a. "overhead", had better come from somewhere.

The kind donations to be listed..

> 5. More importantly than money, keeping the contract and money matters
> enforced requires human supervision. This means that someone who could
> really spend their time hacking wine will need to make sure that the
> commercial companies adhere to our standards.

Okay, now we get to my concerns..... Who is going to do this even if
the listing fee is a poultry $100.00 ? There sure as heck wont be any
money to in force anything.

> 
> I really suggest we adhere to KISS - Keep It Simple. 

And have nothing in place if a rouge company fails to adhear to the LGPL!!!!!!!

I actually liked
> the "hackers rating" idea. If a company is well known among the wine
> hackers, they'll vote for it. If not, list it alphabetically at the end
> of the former list. As I said before, the token cost was meant mostly to
> make sure that the company is still alive, but as Andrew said, sending
> an email once a year to make sure someone responds also works, and does
> not get anyone in trouble with any tax authority.
> 
> Having said all of that, I think I'll actually go with Brian's idea. Let
> him phrase the criteria. Unlike me, he does not have a commercial
> interest in Wine.

I say we have a *OPEN* vote on this..... Democracy at its best...

Tom Wickline

> 
>              Shachar