On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:35 PM Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Paul, > > > (1) Since we don't use the "groovy/groovy-core" repo any longer, I don't > > think that is the correct one to use but rather "apache/groovy". > > As you said in (2), `According to official Apache policy, the ASF > doesn't accept "cash for code"`, I am not sure we can create open > collective > for "apache/groovy" I am not sure either but why not find out for sure? If we (with community hats on) can, that would be ideal. I will try to find out the right person to ask. > (BTW, I can not access "apache/groovy" via my github account). > I haven't set mine up either but I believe you can use two factor authentication now that we are using gitbox: https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > If we can not use "apache/groovy" to create open collective, > "groovy/groovy-core" may be better, but we have to explain the reason in > the > open collective. > > > Also, while the Android Groovy Gradle plugin is no doubt a worthy > > recipient of additional funds, I would be inclined to keep it simple and > > focus on core Groovy for now. > Agreed. > > > this would need to be a community-driven effort rather than an official > > Apache organised activity > > Yep. That's the reason why I sent the email via my personal hotmail. > > > The wording could say "Friends of Groovy", or "All Things Groovy" (to > > mimic the facebook group) or "Gr8 Technologies" rather than "Apache > Groovy > > project" or similar. > > "I would be inclined to keep it simple and focus on core Groovy for > now. ", I think wording focuses on core Groovy would be better, e.g. > "Groovy Programming Language"? > I think it needs to be clear up front that it's not associated with Apache and just "Groovy Programming Language" while not exactly "Apache Groovy project" I suspect isn't clear enough. That's why I suggested "Friends of Groovy". > I suspect, we (as the Apache project) would need to maintain oversight of > > the collective to make sure of this. As far as I know this is slightly > > uncharted territory. > > The opencollective site will record all "contribute" and "submit > expense", which is open to all people, e.g. > https://opencollective.com/vuejs#budget True, that might be enough. We'll have to ask. It does raise the other question though of how expenses will be approved? > > (4) While sponsorship is below what we'd like and below what it has been > > at some previous points in Groovy life, it isn't 0. We have several > > existing sponsors, e.g. OCI. The wording about the collective should take > > that into consideration. > > Yep. OCI is a great company for Groovy! We always appreciate its > sponsorship. > > Let's imagine that would be really great if more people involve into > developing Groovy, more big features(e.g. MOP2, async/await) are completed > and hard issues(e.g. generics of STC) are fixed every year :-) > Totally agree with you, just suggesting the wording used is sensitive to existing players. I can help craft wording if needed. > Cheers, > Daniel.Sun > > > > -- > Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html >
