Hi Aaron, On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:47:57 -0800, Aaron Wolf wrote: > Thanks so much for being proactive! Last year, we had someone from the > team at FOSDEM, but that didn't happen this year although there are > supporters. > > We really need to at least summarize the situation in a public fashion: > > Our lead developer left his dedicated position (and our immediate > funding ran out), although he's staying on as a volunteer. He got the > first real pledging functioning, but too much of the setup and the > operations of the pledging is left in a non-final state. We've been > scrambling (all as volunteers) to get to a state we feel will have a > positive result from lots of attention.
Sadly there isn't a dedicated Haskell or functional devroom this year, otherwise I could target that room as well, as the hallways. I have kept it out of the status text, as I think it would be better in a blog post, since I think it is too detailed for the flyer. > Those who already support us will be excited to see the progress, but > we're not in a good state to give a good first impression. I agree, but a lot of developers can live with that, and the crowd-matching > Our goal is to verify that the actual payout system is operating > correctly and clean up the design so it's acceptable to get good > impression for newcomers. In order to get the payout system tested, there need to be enough patrons to defeat the to keep the fees below 10%. > Anyway, I think the poster does a good job of expressing the in-progress > early-alpha situation. In the debates about whether attention is good > before ready or whatever, I'm not sure what's right. I'm not opposed to > spreading the word with adequate qualifications. > > I do find this bit confusing: > > n patrons pledges n mUSD / month = n^2 mUSD / month > > I understand exactly what it means, but I don't think it's clear enough > to someone seeing the poster. The main goal was to include enough information that people could discuss the concept, hence the technical LaTeX formating, since the document is targeted at a technical audience, instead of the exponential generic graphic. I think mray improved the layout of this. > Typo "too be made" should be "to be made" but I'd change to "will be > adjustable in future" or something like that. Fixed. > Overall, I appreciate the support and pro-activeness enough to lean > toward giving an "okay" in sharing this etc. even though it's not > perfect. Perfect is the enemy of the good. Thanks. > I would like to see what others think. As long as it's totally clear > that this is NOT the big alpha launch announcement, it's better to get > volunteers and interest than not. We definitely need CiviCRM used better > and keep organized that way around the contacts. I agree, Due to the recent Eagle/KiCAD licensing fun, I think KiCAD would be a killer project to add early on, as CERN (who accepts donations for KiCAD) can only handle one-time donations of at least 10 CHF (atm. ~10 USD). > P.S. I saw you made a separate donation as a pre-launch sponsor! Thank > you!! It's in my list to follow up and to add you to the /sponsors page > if you'd like to be listed etc. Sure. -- Best regards Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss