+1 (binding) Best regards, Michael S. Molina
> On 14 Sep 2023, at 00:30, Evan Rusackas <e...@rusackas.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Since it seems the process outlined in the SIP [1] has been largely > non-controversial, I’d like to raise a VOTE > > Please vote accordingly: > > [ ] +1 approve > [ ] +0 no opinion > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason > > P.S. If this vote goes succeeds, we’ll add some tracking sessions to the > community calendar [2], and you’re all invited to attend/assist in the > effort. Let us know in #operational-model-sip-review on Slack [3] if you’d > like to take part in this. > > Thanks, > > -e- > > [1] https://github.com/apache/superset/issues/25218 > [2] https://superset.apache.org/community/ > [3] http://bit.ly/join-superset-slack > > Evan Rusackas > Preset | preset.io > Apache Superset PMC >> On Sep 8, 2023 at 11:11 AM -0600, Evan Rusackas <e...@preset.io.invalid>, >> wrote: >> Hi all, and happy Friday! >> >> I’d like to kick off the official discussion for [SIP-100] Procedure for >> tracking status and implementation of Superset Improvement Proposals (SIPs). >> This is basically aligning on a process of tracking SIPs (and the relevant >> GitHub Issues) more systematically through a kanban board, in hopes that we >> can stay on top of these large items, and eventually (in subsequent >> proposals down the road) evolve this process into a more formal roadmapping >> procedure for Superset. Please read and let me/us know your thoughts! >> >> https://github.com/apache/superset/issues/25218 >> >> All the best, >> >> Evan Rusackas >> Preset | preset.io >> Apache Superset PMC
