#32 Budget review guidelines for APAC

Created 4 years ago by bckurera
Modified 3 months ago

FAmSCo traditionally handles a large part of the Fedora budget, but local communities now have the opportunity to decide themselves and take decisions. Therefore it is required have a concrete guideline on "how it is done".

As follow different levels will be set up so that decisions can be taken appropriately:

USD 0 - 100: Only a peer review is needed. In this context 'peer' means either a community credit card holder or an individual FAmSCo member. If the request is made by a FAmSCo member then it should be reviewed by another FAmSCo member or community credit card holder, the one who makes the request cannot approve it.

USD 101 - 500: Review by the local community is needed. This should happen in an IRC meeting and the approval needs to be documented in the meeting logs (please use meetbot's #agreed command).

USD 501 - 5000: Review by FAmSCo is required. The should either happen in the weekly IRC meetings or in trac. The approval must be documented either in the meeting logs or in a trac ticket.

Note that for everything > USD 5000 we need a PO, this means we need someone from Red Hat (FPL, CommArch? or Engineering).

** This is related for APAC region only.

Leave your suggestions, idea. This is not yet fixed so any change can be made.

Should we introduce allowances for differing costs of events in different countries? Else it would be harder for local communities in some countries to organize (e.g. Indonesia is harder than Malaysia, travel cost-wise)

I have said this many times but I don't think setting limits like these has any value without assigning actual real budgets to those groups and having those groups be responsible for those real budgets. Without that these are just numbers and groups have no budgetary reason to reject anything under those limits.

Please combine such rules with a more complete budget plan so they can be evaluated in a meaningful context.

I agree with the idea. That way all will be processed faster.

Replying to [comment:2 inode0]:

I have said this many times but I don't think setting limits like these has any value without assigning actual real budgets to those groups and having those groups be responsible for those real budgets. Without that these are just numbers and groups have no budgetary reason to reject anything under those limits.

Please combine such rules with a more complete budget plan so they can be evaluated in a meaningful context.

+1. We should clarify this before thinking more.

any updates on this? or it should be closed?

I see this has been summarized (as draft) on wiki [1], right?

We can also learn a lot from LATAM [2] and FAMNA [3] ones. At the first glance, they look simpler (and easier to follow) than APAC one.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/APAC/Reimbursement
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/LATAM/Reimbursement
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAMNA_Reimbursement_Guidelines

[1] is the guideline for APAC to follow when fund request should be placed. It is comprehensive and I dont see any complexity. We cannot be more simple it should cover each and every aspect otherwise there would be problems in future when we face some situations. APAC one was written first and LATAM inherit some.

Being exact what are the point that you think it is not easy to follow, will discuss and change if required !

Thanks

[1] ‚Äčhttps://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/APAC/Reimbursement

Hi bckurera,

I have reviewed the whole page. Something should be considered to change:

  1. Report after event is mandatory (the same with requests for Travel Subsidies?). So you should add some instructions in Event section or somewhere.

  2. The rule "Do upload receipts not more than 2 months from the approval." should be changed to "Do upload receipts not more than 2 months from the event/real-work occurred.". Sometimes, people send request early (that should be encouraged).

  3. Is there any process for Fedora Contributors other than Ambassadors? Do you think your current proposed rule: "if all the event owners are not FAms please ask a local Fedora Ambassador to support." works fine? What's happen if they can not contact with any ambassadors around?

  4. I see "Limits per trac ticket" are different among regions so we can equalize them or we should clarify that is for APAC only.

  5. Fix some typos: URL to fedora-apac trac, "wrnagler", etc.

Rgds,
Tuan

closing since this ticket is served

3 months ago

Metadata Update from @bckurera:
- Issue assigned to bckurera

Login to comment on this ticket.

famsco 281

cancel