[Pilot] - JSON Schema Implementers Program

[benjagm]

How to better support implementers has been a priority for the last year, as discussed in the roadmap here. However, the employment status of some full-time maintainers changed, and as a result, some of the project's maintainers were less available to support the project.

Implementers are still critical, but the new context will require a new approach to be able to create a program with a reduced scope but clear incentives for implementers.

Proposal

Id like to create a program that implementers can apply with some direct benefits.

Goals

• Primary goal: Support Implementers with their challenges with a focus on getting more contributors and connecting them with other support programs.
• Secondary goal: Project a more solid relation between JSON Schema Spec and the Tooling. This will help to project more trust and improve adoption.
• Indirectly, this will help to increase the number of compliance implementations and the number of implementations using the test suite and available in Bowtie.

Benefits

• Community Managers will drive traffic of new contributors there when they get contributors interested in a specific Language.
• These implementers can add ideas to get a slot in our Google Summer of Code, and In case JSON Schema is selected as a mentoring org, it will mean a full-time contributor during the summer and the possibility of a 500$ org stipend through Google.
• We will amplify their updates on social media.
• Special badge on the tooling page.

Requirements:

• Support the last version of the spec.
• Implement the JSON Schema Test Suite (When this applies).
• The tool is on the Tooling page.
• The tool is on Bowtie (When this applies).
• The tool is non-commercial open source.

Success criteria to move from Pilot to real program:

• Get at least 25 applications.

Next steps

This is my proposal, and I think it will be very easy to be executed. As a previous step I'd like to get some feedback from the Implementers Community to see if we can make some extra adjustements.

[mwadams]

I think the stipend should be targeted at a specific goal, detailed in the application.

It doesn't have to be a "feature" goal - it could be bootstrapping a targeted marketing program, or to offer a free support scheme or something. But we should understand what the intended impact should be.

[benjagm]

I think the stipend should be targeted at a specific goal, detailed in the application.

This is great feedback Matthew. I updated the issue with more details on this direction.

[gregsdennis]

[Edit: The below was in response to the original proposal.]

The stipend, to me, seems like a lottery and a breeding ground for favoritism. I had reservations when I read that we're going to help implementers find financial support (we have that problem ourselves), and on top of that we're going to be giving $1000 away every year? I'm extremely hesitant about this.

Secondly, who is eligible? I certainly meet all of the requirements, as do many of the other TSC members. But then using this program to claim money for myself appears selfish and presents a poor image for the project.

The tool is OpenSource (Just in case of receiving contributors or being part of GSoC, not for other benefits).

This needs to be "non-commercial open source". I don't want to financially support someone who is selling their tool.

---

I'm all for supporting our tooling maintainers, but I feel it needs to be focused more on the technical aspects. We have people ask questions, but we don't do a lot of outreach. I had started that when we joined Postman (and got mainly silence back).

I thought this was going to be like the other programs you've proposed, nominating someone to be a go-to for managing implementer needs.

[benjagm]

Great feedback. Thanks @gregsdennis and @mwadams

[mwadams]

As a focus for the GSOC program, I think this is a great idea, to encourage people to contribute throughout the year leading up to GSOC.

[jviotti]

Leaving the stipend discussions aside, an implementers program makes sense. Particularly to share ideas about how JSON Schema can be implemented, common pitfalls, help debug failing scenarios, etc.

[jdesrosiers]

using this program to claim money for myself appears selfish and presents a poor image for the project.

Very strong disagree. Our implementations are the backbone of the community. When people are trying to learn how something is supposed to work, they go to our implementations and our web playgrounds because the trust us to get it right. We "insiders" contribute more value to the community than anyone else and it's not selfish or a poor image for the project to provide the most financial support for the projects that contribute the most. We should definitely be supporting more than just us, but we shouldn't feel bad if we are the biggest beneficiaries.

I think we should setup recurring Github Sponsors payments for any actively maintained implementation that wants it to the maximum that we have the financial means. There should be different tiers of support depending on things like active development, community involvement of the maintainer, and community relevance of the implementation. We should also entertain applications for grants for special projects. Currently our financial means are quite low and it's likely that for now, we won't be able to support much more than the implementations with the most community relevance. We shouldn't feel bad if that's just us for now while we try to expand the program to support as many implementations as we can.

GSoC is for mentoring students learning about open source. It's not a substitute for supporting implementers. Most implementers are not students and we can and should do better than just supporting students.

Ultimately, we need to be making better use of our Open Collective funds and I think using it support open source developers in our community (including and especially us) is a great use of those funds.

[github-actions]

Hello! 👋

This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to inactivity 😴

It will be closed in 180 days if no further activity occurs. To keep it active, please add a comment with more details.

There can be many reasons why a specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is a lack of time, not a lack of interest.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through our slack channel : https://json-schema.org/slack

Thank you for your patience ❤️