Contributor stipend nomination to @Utkarsh-123github

[benjagm]

Hi everyone,

I’d like to highlight the great contributions from @Utkarsh-123github between June and September. Even though I wasn’t selected for GSoC, he suggested continuing to contribute and pursue some open source mentoring. This turned out to be a very valuable experience — both for him as a mentee and for me as a mentor.

In recognition of his efforts, I’d like to nominate him to receive a contributor stipend from the quarterly allocation (I believe the amount was $300).

I’d appreciate the TSC’s support with this request.

Thanks!

[benjagm]

/vote

[git-vote]

Vote created

@benjagm has called for a vote on Contributor stipend nomination to @Utkarsh-123github (#33).

The members of the following teams have binding votes:

Team
@json-schema-org/tsc

Non-binding votes are also appreciated as a sign of support!

How to vote

You can cast your vote by reacting to this comment. The following reactions are supported:

In favor	Against	Abstain
👍	👎	👀

Please note that voting for multiple options is not allowed and those votes won't be counted.

The vote will be open for 28days. It will pass if at least 75% of the users with binding votes vote In favor 👍. Once it's closed, results will be published here as a new comment.

[jdesrosiers]

In recognition of his efforts, I’d like to nominate him to receive a contributor stipend from the quarterly allocation

I'd like to support this, but I don't think we can do this in the way it's currently written. Legally, we can use our funds to pay an invoice for services rendered or to reimburse for an expense related to running or promoting JSON Schema. There's also a third category, grants. We talked about supporting grants, but we currently aren't setup with OpenCollective to give grants. Apparently there's extra steps that we would need to take to enable that. Even if we could give grants at this time, grants need to be for producing something or accomplishing something. Legally, the grant needs to be tied to some outcome. In no case can we legally just give money in recognition of someone's efforts. OpenCollective will deny the payment.

(I believe the amount was $300).

That's not quite how it works. We said $350 per month for the quarter, but that just means we'll have a pool of $1,050 to distribute for the quarter. It doesn't mean we give $350 to one thing every month. People are expected to make grant proposals saying how much they need, what the money will be spent on, and what will be accomplished or produced.

---

So, if we want to spend money on Utkarsh, I think it needs to be for some service rendered. My original budget proposal included $50/month for someone to maintain the website. This person would be responsible for things like reviewing and merging PRs and managing the backlog. There are currently 91 open issues and 37 open PRs, so that job clearly isn't getting done and it would be good to incentivize someone to do that work by providing a small payment for that work. Is that something you think Utkarsh is qualified for, willing to, and interested in doing? That's one way I can see pivoting on the proposal to something we can legally do.

If that's an acceptable pivot, I'd like to see a proposal for how much Utkarsh is asking per month, how much time per week he will commit to the work, and what his roles and responsibilities will be.

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 75%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	9

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@karenetheridge	Pending
@Julian	Pending
@mwadams	Pending
@awwright	Pending
@jdesrosiers	Pending
@Relequestual	Pending
@jviotti	Pending
@gregsdennis	Pending
@benjagm	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 75%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	9

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@karenetheridge	Pending
@Julian	Pending
@mwadams	Pending
@awwright	Pending
@jdesrosiers	Pending
@Relequestual	Pending
@jviotti	Pending
@gregsdennis	Pending
@benjagm	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 75%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	9

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@karenetheridge	Pending
@Julian	Pending
@mwadams	Pending
@awwright	Pending
@jdesrosiers	Pending
@Relequestual	Pending
@jviotti	Pending
@gregsdennis	Pending
@benjagm	Pending

[benjagm]

Hi @jdesrosiers My apologies for the late response.

Utkarsh have been working with me all summer after not being selected for GSoC. He was really interested in contributing to the project and he did. Please find below the details of his contributions between June/September:

• Contributed across multiple JSON Schema organization repositories, focusing on documentation, automation, and ecosystem improvement.
• Built the “Previous Editions” section for the JSON Schema Conference website from scratch, with clear contribution guidelines for future updates.
• Migrated all adopter data into the JSON Schema Landscape and added two new adopters.
• Automated the PR Review Board workflow
• Introduced a new guideline outlining the entire PR review process.
• Added 10+ new tools to the JSON Schema ecosystem after thorough verification.
• Completed 18 merged PRs, raised 6 major accepted issues, and resolved 24 total issues.
• Reviewed 20+ PRs and collaborated with contributors to resolve technical and process-related challenges.
• Worked closely with Benjamin to improve repository maintenance, successfully reduced open issues from 90+ to nearly 60 and open PRs from 40+ to just 10 in the website repository.
• Link to my contribution project board: https://github.com/orgs/json-schema-org/projects/43/views/1

Even thought he committed to contribute without any monetary reward, I think he can take advantage of now that we are starting a process to support contributors.

[jdesrosiers]

@benjagm I think you're missing the point. We can't give money "in recognition" of someone's efforts. I'm not saying I don't want to, I'm saying it's not legal. It needs to be an invoice for a service provided or a reimbursement. I'm not questioning the quantity or value of his contributions. I'm saying we need to frame it differently. Even if we approve it, OpenCollective will reject it because it's not an invoice or reimbursement. Before we can even consider whether to spend money on this and how much, the proposal needs to be framed into something we can legally do.

The best we can do is frame it as an invoice for website maintenance services for Q2 and pretend we approved the work ahead of time. It has to be a payment for service rendered, not a "monetary reward".

I think he can take advantage of now that we are starting a process to support contributors.

We don't have a process to support contributors. We talked about doing a grants program like I described in my previous comment, but we aren't set up with OpenCollective for that and we don't have a process for making it happen either. Even if we were able to give grants, this wouldn't qualify. The money needs to be given for the purpose of accomplishing something or producing something. We can't give it as prize money.

Everything we've done lately has fit into the legal framework. We pay for community management services and spec repo maintenance. These are services that we approved and at the end of the month, people invoice for their services the previous month. We've also approved travel expense reimbursement for a couple of people we sent to a conference to represent JSON Schema at our booth.

The way you've written this proposal doesn't fit into the legal framework we have to work within. If you can rewrite it in terms of paying for a service, then we can begin to discuss if we want to make this happen and how much.

[git-vote]

Vote closed

The vote did not pass.

0.00% of the users with binding vote were in favor and 0.00% were against (passing threshold: 75%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	9