On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 2:46 PM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > TL;DR is: take the below as feedback to consider, and proceed as you > see fit. Nobody's suggesting you can't do this. > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 2:58 AM Lars Francke <lars.fran...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The way I read your point is that anyone can publish material (which > includes source code) under the ALv2 outside of the ASF so why should they > donate anything to the ASF? > > If that's what you meant why have Apache Spark or any other Apache > project for that matter. > >> I think your premise is that people will _collaborate_ on training > >> materials if there's an ASF project around it. Maybe so but see below. > > That's our hope, yes. Should we not do this because it _could_ fail? > > Yep this is the answer to your question. The ASF exists to facilitate > collaboration, not just host. I think the dynamics around > collaboration on open standard software vs training materials are > materially different. >
I don't see a big difference between the two things. Content is already being collaborated on today (see documentation, websites and the few instances of training that exist or Wikipedia for that matter). I'm afraid we'll need to agree to disagree on this one. > > We - as a company - have created material and sold it for years but > every time I give a training I see something that I should have updated and > it's become impossible to keep up. I see the same outdated material from > other organizations, we've talked to half a dozen or so training companies > and they all have the same problem. To create quality training material you > really need someone with deep insider knowledge, and those people are hard > to come by. > > So we're trying to shift and collaborate on the material and then > differentiate ourselves by the trainer itself. > > I think this hand-waves past a lot of the concern raised here, but OK > it's an experiment. > I don't think it's 'wrong' to try to get people to collaborate on > slides, sure. It may work well. If it doesn't for reasons raised here, > well, worse things have happened. > Consider how you might mitigate possible problems: > a) what happens when another company wants to donate its Spark content? > This has been decided at the ASF level already (allow competing projects, e.g. Flink & Spark). At the Apache Training level we briefly talked about that as well. I don't want to go into details of the process but the short version is: We'd accept anything and would then try to incorporate it into existing stuff. b) can you enshrine some best practices like making sure the content > disclaims official association with the ASF? e.g. a trainer delivering > it has to note the source but make clear it's not Apache training, > Yes. > etc. >
