In short, this statement makes no sense and is confusing and unhelpful.
Working group participation fees paid by members are contributed to Eclipse Foundation to enable the Eclipse Foundation to fulfill its Purposes. The Purposes are defined in the Bylaws and further in the working group charter, but in summary - the fees are collected to allow the Eclipse Foundation to do its work. The funds collected are not somehow “owned” by the working group or for the working group to administer - and as a result, the statement you have made makes no sense. That is, Eclipse does not purchase services from itself.
Moreover, you seem to be introducing language that conveys that the Foundation somehow doesn’t participate in the working group. Again in short, it does. MicroProfile is an Eclipse working group, and Eclipse does operate it. It’s great that our Members and broader community all contribute to MicroProfile - we are in full agreement, and this is consistent with all our working groups so there is nothing special here. But please don’t conflate this community participation to somehow indicate Eclipse isn’t somehow the vendor neutral entity that operates the working group and carries out work on behalf of the working group.
Amelia, I get this is not the financial or operating model you likely wish it to be, as we have had this discussion previously. But so be it - it is in fact the model we have all agreed to work under. I’ll ask you to stop making such statements as it’s confusing and distracting, and takes away from the planning and execution process to deliver value for all involved.
Thanks
Paui