+1 (binding)

I would also opt for a better name.


Am 02.09.19, 21:03 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:

    +1 (binding)
    It should run through the ip clearance of the incubator as well as 
potentially a name check, if we want to stick to crunch or for any alternate 
name we might be coming up with (we should come up with the name before 
creating the repo) guess if it's Somethong like "plc4x compute" or "plc4x 
edge", we don't need that, but if it's a separate name, we should.
    Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
    From: Julian Feinauer <j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de>
    Sent: Monday, September 2, 2019 8:56:34 PM
    To: dev@plc4x.apache.org <dev@plc4x.apache.org>
    Subject: [VOTE] Accept CRUNCH as subproject for PLC4X
    Hi all,
    as the discussion seems to slow down and to stabilizes in [1] I take the 
freedom to start a vote.
    The vote is ONLY about accepting the project CRUNCH [2] as a subproject to 
PLC4X (its not about changing the TLPs Name, or changing the scope of the 
project or other things that came up during the DISCUSS).
    Before CRUNCH could be integrated it has to go through clearance from the 
incubator before being integrated into the project but also a PMC Vote is 
required. Also a name change is very likely as the current name conflicts with 
Apache Crunch [3].
    As usual the vote will be open for at least 72hours and the options are
    +1 – accept CRUNCH as a subproject for PLC4X
    0 – no opinion
    -1 – do not accept CRUNCH as a subproject for PLC4X (please give reasons 
for that)
    [2] https://github.com/pragmaticminds/crunch
    [3] http://crunch.apache.org/

Reply via email to