+1 (binding)
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:34 AM Kevin Yang wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 2:47 PM Kamil Breguła
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 23:35 Daniel Imberman
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 binding
> > >
> > > via Newton Mail
> > > [
> > >
> >
>
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for checking that. I like the idea of using the queue field too. I
will make the change and tag you in the PR.
Best wishes
Ping Zhang
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 9:10 AM Daniel Imberman
wrote:
> Hi Ping,
>
> This looks great! The only change I might suggest is maybe we check
Did a new pass to define what changes may be considered worth an AIP.
Regarding GitHub issues, after seeing SIP-0 I quite liked it. Seems way
more lightweight and reduces issue of having to ask for permissions for it
to be accepted. I do think it may be out of scope for this conversation to
I’d be happy to help amalgamate some core logos and get them on whatever
website page makes the most sense- would be even better if we could link to
some case studies :).
On Aug 26, 2020, 10:00 AM -0400, Jarek Potiuk , wrote:
> Actually doing both *might* be the best of three worlds :)
>
> On
Actually doing both *might* be the best of three worlds :)
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 2:36 PM Peter DeJoy wrote:
> I do think that users are going to have a much harder time getting their
> company’s logo approved for the Airflow website; in my experience, there’s
> a completely different approval
I do think that users are going to have a much harder time getting their
company’s logo approved for the Airflow website; in my experience, there’s a
completely different approval process that needs to be followed to use logos in
marketing contexts. There should be a community-built canonical
Agree that categorisation (and especially logos) on the webpage - it could
be much more appealing (our Ecosystem page for one could also benefit from
that).
I just wanted to stress that there might be different opinions on that and
different goals that we might want to achieve as a community. And
Last opinion on this one: as I said in one of the previous emails it would
be better if we can also categorize it before
it makes it to the website. My opinion is having a page with just names and
links on the "website" won't look good.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:07 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
Thanks, I am actually surprised by some statements but anyways, let me try
to explain:
I am not at all sure what is the base for that assumption. We have
> different kinds of people - some are Contributors (they generally go to
> Github) but some are just Users and for them the main source of
I asked our marketing/PR people for an opinion on the read/discoverability
part,
But for the "write part" I do not necessarily agree with the assumption
"(1) happening a lot lot lesser".
I am not at all sure what is the base for that assumption. We have
different kinds of people - some are
Thanks Kevin, Looking forward to see you on the next call.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:54 Kevin Yang wrote:
> Thank you Kaxil, this is extremely helpful. We'll try to join at least the
> next meeting trying to see if we can provide more perspectives on
> SmartSensor and anything else we can help.
If we could categorize the companies by sector somehow (someone needs to
look them up), then with their logos, that would look great on website.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 11:50 Kaxil Naik wrote:
> The page (wherever it lives) has 2 users:
>
> 1) Adds/edits their company to that page
> 2) Viewer -
The page (wherever it lives) has 2 users:
1) Adds/edits their company to that page
2) Viewer - wants to see who is using it which like Bolke mentioned would
be more useful if it is categorized based on Sector.
If this goes on the website, I see (1) happening a lot lot lesser than it
is now. If
One more thought - why I think this is important and why we should discuss
it and vote.
I think this should be a bit of PR/marketing/discovery decision. not only
regarding the commits to the repository.
Having such a list on the website impacts the way it is returned in Google
(and other search
I believe, there is also a value in having the list of users in the
airlfow.apache.org (and at least Felix said it's valuable). I do
not consider that as "done" in our discussion.
For the reasons described above (stage/maturity) I would love to hear other
opinions.
I think we should make a
Also to add to my last email, I think the general consensus was to move it
out of Readme but there were no strong opinions on where and I think the
"INTHEWILD" (or a renamed version of it) is a good of both the world,
Readme is cleaner and it stays with Airflow Repo.
I do not think this needs a
I think keeping it in the Airflow repo itself is a good idea. Like Ry
mentioned it is a good incentive for people/new users to get their 1sr
commit in. Moving it to any other place means it is very less likely to
update.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:25 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hey,
>
> So I see that
Thank you Kaxil, this is extremely helpful. We'll try to join at least the
next meeting trying to see if we can provide more perspectives on
SmartSensor and anything else we can help.
Cheers,
Kevin Y
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:28 PM Kaxil Naik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have created a document to
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 2:47 PM Kamil Breguła
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 23:35 Daniel Imberman
> wrote:
>
> > +1 binding
> >
> > via Newton Mail
> > [
> >
> https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=dx=10.0.50=10.15.5=email_footer_2
> > ]
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020
Hey,
So I see that we have already moved to "IN_THE_WILD.md" but I am not sure
we have a consensus yet.
That's ok as an experiment, I think, but I am not sure we are all ok with
it and we should continue the discussion and likely end it up with a
[VOTE]. While this is a an "easy and fast" change
20 matches
Mail list logo
