Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

paulk_asert
Some points:

(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". 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. We can create additional collectives for other Gradle/IDE plugins if this one proves successful.
(2) According to official Apache policy, the ASF doesn't accept "cash for code", so this would need to be a community-driven effort rather than an official Apache organised activity. 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. We can ask for clarification from Apache marketing/legal but probably easiest if we have something to show them and ask what might need to be changed.
(3) Having stated (2), it is still the project's responsibility to protect the Groovy trademark and Apache/Groovy "brands". 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. I would propose to include some proposal in the collective wording along the lines of "there will always be someone from the Apache Groovy Project actively involved in the collective". We can run this by the Apache board and adapt if needed.
(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. Perhaps some wording along the lines of "this is to augment any direct sponsorships from individual companies".

Cheers, Paul.


On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:56 PM 孙 岚 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

      As we all know, Groovy is lack of sponsorship and slows down its steps since Pivotal stopped sponsoring in 2014. Groovy needs more resources to complete big features and fix hard issues, e.g. MOP2, async/await, Refining generics of STC, Supporting Java11+ fully without warnings, etc. 

      I propose to create open collective for Groovy programming language, which can help Groovy Community to collect money to sponsor developing Groovy. Even if the collected money is very few every year, something is better than nothing! 

      Here are 2 steps to create open collective for Groovy(as the following snapshots show).  "OSC will assist in managing the funds of the Fund; it will collect the income and will pay and disburse the net income and principal for purposes of the Project as specifically set forth in the Protocols."(SEE the details in attachment 1) 

      As groovy/groovy-core is not my personal project, so I am requesting permission from you before I create open collective. To be frank, I am not sure whether it conforms to the Apache policy, so I send the email as a Groovy enthusiast(not a Apache committer) via my own hotmail(not the apache mail). I wish we could create open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community.

      FYI, many open source projects have created open collective, e.g.

      Any thoughts?

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun

Steps to create open collective for Groovy

       



(Terms & Conditions details can be found in the attachments of this email)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

Daniel Sun
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"(BTW, I can not access "apache/groovy" via my github
account).
     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 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

> (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 :-)

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun



--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

Daniel Sun
In reply to this post by paulk_asert
Here is the introduction of Open Source Collective 501c6 (Non Profit):
https://opencollective.com/opensourcecollective

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun




--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

Guillaume Laforge
Administrator
In reply to this post by Daniel Sun
It's worth trying!

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:35 AM Daniel Sun <[hidden email]> 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"(BTW, I can not access "apache/groovy" via my github
account).
     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 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

> (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 :-)

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun



--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html


--
Guillaume Laforge
Apache Groovy committer
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

paulk_asert
In reply to this post by Daniel Sun


On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:35 PM Daniel Sun <[hidden email]> 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
MG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

MG
In reply to this post by paulk_asert
Hi Daniel,

totally agree, great initiative, all for it.
I would hope a lot of the many Groovy users would give a little, than it should be easy to get some solid base funding for Groovy.
To the Elders of Groovy: Unless you have some serious concerns, please don't overthink/overoptimize this and let's just go ahead with it :-)

Cheers,
mg


Am 08.01.2019 um 03:55 schrieb 孙 岚:
Hi all,

      As we all know, Groovy is lack of sponsorship and slows down its steps since Pivotal stopped sponsoring in 2014. Groovy needs more resources to complete big features and fix hard issues, e.g. MOP2, async/await, Refining generics of STC, Supporting Java11+ fully without warnings, etc. 

      I propose to create open collective for Groovy programming language, which can help Groovy Community to collect money to sponsor developing Groovy. Even if the collected money is very few every year, something is better than nothing! 

      Here are 2 steps to create open collective for Groovy(as the following snapshots show).  "OSC will assist in managing the funds of the Fund; it will collect the income and will pay and disburse the net income and principal for purposes of the Project as specifically set forth in the Protocols."(SEE the details in attachment 1) 

      As groovy/groovy-core is not my personal project, so I am requesting permission from you before I create open collective. To be frank, I am not sure whether it conforms to the Apache policy, so I send the email as a Groovy enthusiast(not a Apache committer) via my own hotmail(not the apache mail). I wish we could create open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community.

      FYI, many open source projects have created open collective, e.g.

      Any thoughts?

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun

Steps to create open collective for Groovy

       



(Terms & Conditions details can be found in the attachments of this email)


MG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

MG
(PS: Sorry, just saw the dev post and immediately replied to that...)

Am 08.01.2019 um 22:35 schrieb MG:
Hi Daniel,

totally agree, great initiative, all for it.
I would hope a lot of the many Groovy users would give a little, than it should be easy to get some solid base funding for Groovy.
To the Elders of Groovy: Unless you have some serious concerns, please don't overthink/overoptimize this and let's just go ahead with it :-)

Cheers,
mg


Am 08.01.2019 um 03:55 schrieb 孙 岚:
Hi all,

      As we all know, Groovy is lack of sponsorship and slows down its steps since Pivotal stopped sponsoring in 2014. Groovy needs more resources to complete big features and fix hard issues, e.g. MOP2, async/await, Refining generics of STC, Supporting Java11+ fully without warnings, etc. 

      I propose to create open collective for Groovy programming language, which can help Groovy Community to collect money to sponsor developing Groovy. Even if the collected money is very few every year, something is better than nothing! 

      Here are 2 steps to create open collective for Groovy(as the following snapshots show).  "OSC will assist in managing the funds of the Fund; it will collect the income and will pay and disburse the net income and principal for purposes of the Project as specifically set forth in the Protocols."(SEE the details in attachment 1) 

      As groovy/groovy-core is not my personal project, so I am requesting permission from you before I create open collective. To be frank, I am not sure whether it conforms to the Apache policy, so I send the email as a Groovy enthusiast(not a Apache committer) via my own hotmail(not the apache mail). I wish we could create open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community.

      FYI, many open source projects have created open collective, e.g.

      Any thoughts?

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun

Steps to create open collective for Groovy

       



(Terms & Conditions details can be found in the attachments of this email)



MG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

MG
In reply to this post by paulk_asert


Am 08.01.2019 um 11:54 schrieb Paul King:

 
> (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.
 


Might be worth thinking about whether existing sponsors would consider giving their donation through the same channel ? Could have different tiers of sponsorship (gold, silver, etc), with respective logo sizes, etc to differentiate. Would lead to a greater exposure for them...
I guess it would also not be too hard to integrate a sponsor names or logos into e.g. Groovy console (if Apache allows that)...

Cheers,
mg



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

Daniel.Sun
In reply to this post by paulk_asert
If we can not create open collective for " apache/groovy" and
"groovy/groovy-core" is not a correct choice, we can create open collective
whose category is "Association" and we can call it "Groovy Community" or
something similar.

P.S. Even if I can access "apache/groovy" via my github account, I still can
not see the project in opencollective site when connecting to github. Take
it easy, I just have a try to access it ;-)

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun




-----
Apache Groovy committer
Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me 
Twitter: @daniel_sun

--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html
Apache Groovy committer & PMC member

Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
Twitter: @daniel_sun
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community

Daniel.Sun
In reply to this post by MG
Hi MG,

      I sent the email to user mailing list as well. Thanks for your sharing
thoughts :)

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun



-----
Apache Groovy committer
Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me 
Twitter: @daniel_sun

--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html
Apache Groovy committer & PMC member

Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
Twitter: @daniel_sun
12