Hi Julian,

I had already sent an update ... I had initially just copied the text from the 
adopters page ... 
Well I thought that we would have multiple rows for multiple people involved 
and for each specify their involvement ... not sure if we should have a table 
in a table or similar.

Chris


Am 05.06.20, 13:36 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de>:

    LGTM.

    Although I suggest some changes in the table:
    - More important than a company description would be what they offer (see 
e.g. Postgres Page: 
https://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_support/europe/)
    - I would make it a bit smaler
    - And Involvement level we should standardize a bit perhaps. You wrote "PMC 
Member ". But what does that mean? The company? No. One employee? Two?
    - I would state "muliple Employees are PMC members" (which is also true for 
cc).

    WDYT?

    J

    Am 05.06.20, 13:03 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:

        Hi all,

        I have just added a new page to the PLC4X website, however it’s not yet 
linked in the navigation and therefore should remain invisible until Google 
indexes this email ;-)
        It will be available soon from here (As soon as Jenkins is done):
        https://plc4x.apache.org/users/commercial-support.html


        What we have there is pretty inspired by the support page of the Apache 
Royale project:
        https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/

        However I used some different wording and a different proposal for a 
process to add entries.

        I would suggest to use PRs as this way we can have the account of the 
PR creator on-file in git-blame. Which might come in handy if there should ever 
be problems.

        We were told that in general everyone would be required to have 
him/herself added to that list no matter their involvement with the project. 
That’s why I decided to start with this in my proposal. I think with a column 
on the level of involvement should separate the true contributors from the 
others.

        I think there were also voices that said that an alternative would be a 
PMC vote, but with very strict rules to how this vote should be done and all 
votes should have to be performed without any individual bias.

        I asked the Royale project on how they dealt with entry requests to 
that list … they sort of laughed as they didn’t seem to really get any requests 
at all.

        What’s your opinion on this … also the ASF’s opinion is greatly 
appreciated as we don’t want to do anything that could harm the ASF.

        So I would really like to do it the way I proposed it, but that’s just 
my opinion … your other opinions are worth just as much (Well ok … the ASF’s 
opinion will probably weigh more ;-) )


        Chris



Reply via email to