+1 binding
> On 14 Sep 2023, at 05:30, Evan Rusackas <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>,
> 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
