Hi Julian,
the only reason I added that was that this way I was hoping to reduce your
hesitation to have just anyone listed.
I think there is nothing preventing us from just taking the first three columns.
But I think we need to have anyone listed who asks to be listed (even if it's a
company called "acoolcompany" which would be listed first.
With having the PMC vote on who should be listed and who should not is probably
a slippery slope which I wouldn't like to walk on.
Chris
Am 06.06.20, 10:37 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hi Chris,
I think ist a good idea to model it as other projects do it BUT I don’t
like the way this is setup.
One thing we take very high at apache is the "two hats" principle.
Thus I dislike that companies list "all" their employees that are comitters
/ pmcs like a "trophy", that feels un-apache-esque to me.
As you know probably better than myself at Apache we value the community
and also non-pmc or non-committer contributors and contributions.
And thus I think a company can also have enough achievement or value to be
listed without having a committer to present.
So I really object the name listing as this is too much "hat mixing" for me.
Julian
Am 05.06.20, 20:45 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:
Hi all,
it seems we can rowspan in tables with asciidoc:
https://mrhaki.blogspot.com/2014/12/awesome-asciidoctor-span-cell-over-rows.html
So I would suggest to rowspan the logo name and the description of
companies and to have the remaining columns one row per employee.
Chris
Am 05.06.20, 15:19 schrieb "Christofer Dutz"
<christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:
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
