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

Reply via email to