RFC: Organizations for Sourcehut
lists.sr.ht
lists.sr.ht
Interesting billing model, although I can imagine many orgs would rather have a simpler billing scenario even if it were more expensive.
> Additionally, organizations may have their own billing information associated with the org itself. They can use this to sponsor the accounts of their members, allowing the billing for a tightly coupled group of users (e.g. staff members at a company or organization) to have access to centralized billing. Through this they can meet the 50% requirement without having individual members pay up.
Organizations can have centralized/simpler billing with this proposal
What about just allowing paying users to create many (some high number) orgs for up to 5 people? Maybe scaling a bit if multiple paying users are inside. Then bigger orgs need to be paid.
> Users who are members of an organization and have a paid account, regardless if by their own means or by way of sponsorship from the org, have access to both the org's resources and private ownership of resources on SourceHut, e.g. can submit builds.sr.ht jobs on their own account. Org members with unpaid accounts can access the org resources, but cannot hold private resources on SourceHut.
> The goal of this approach is to allow users to form grassroots orgs without too much hassle over payment; to allow companies and formal organizations to manage billing centrally for their members; and to balance things such that adding Joe Support Tech to the bug trackers does not mean you have to pay for a full SourceHut account for them, while still incentivizing people to pay for more than 50% if their members would benefit from access to private resources (e.g. the dev team might all have paid accounts regardless of if it exceeds the 50% minimum, just because it's worth the money to them).
> Additionally, organizations may have their own billing information associated with the org itself. They can use this to sponsor the accounts of their members, allowing the billing for a tightly coupled group of users (e.g. staff members at a company or organization) to have access to centralized billing. Through this they can meet the 50% requirement without having individual members pay up.
So companies can do the usual thing of paying for a bunch of accounts for their users. It's just that individuals can also form organisations without having to set up collective billing.
Well, that sure isn't a disaster waiting to happen!