On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 at 02:27, Jason R. Coombs firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
My preference would be for these projects to enroll individually, and for those maintainers that wish to direct the project’s compensation to the PSF or another entity should do so, and those that wish to distribute the compensation to contributors or co-maintainers should do so. For example, in the CherryPy projects, I share compensation with a co-maintainer and on Setuptools, I’ve offered equal shares to those aiding substantially with the maintenance.
I think this is a good way to look at it. For setuptools, you're happy to take on the responsibility of accepting the funds directly and deciding how they should be spent/distributed, and your co-maintainers are happy with the way you're handling that, so it isn't necessary to mess with that approach.
For the other PyPA projects in Dustin's list that *aren't* already registered with Tidelift, the maintainers now have the option of directing the PSF to take on the fiscal responsibilities of joining Tidelift, while nominating one or more people to take on the technical responsibilities.