I think this is a great idea. Inclusion on such a list should be as simple as putting it to a PMC vote. If we need to formalise guidelines at some point, we can do that in a lazy evaluated way. ;)
On 16 October 2014 11:06, Garren Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I like the idea of linking of professional services. One thing I would like > to see is that people that have committer status or are on the PMC are move > visible. That will encourage other people that want to offer Couchdb > services to contribute to Couchdb to get committer status. > > Cheers > Garren > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi Jan, >> > >> > I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the >> ones >> > we have to answer. My comments inline. >> > >> > On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >>>> Heya Marketingers, >> >>>> >> >>>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and >> >> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional >> >> services or support offerings. >> >>>> >> >>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and >> that >> >> commercial services are being catered to. >> >>>> >> >>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where >> >> that’s not an option. >> >>>> >> >>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer >> >> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit. >> >>>> >> >>>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or >> >> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that >> exist >> >> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if >> needed. >> >>>> >> >>>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open >> questions: >> >>>> - who decides which offerings get listed? >> >> >> > >> > if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of >> > people (review team?) and approve in consensus. >> > >> > >> >>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry? >> >> >> > >> > if the before mentioned group has objections concerning: >> > >> > * general quality of the service / product >> > * not following the branding and trademark rules >> > * not clear who the people are behind the service >> > * "black hat" people at the service >> > >> > >> >>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after >> all? >> >> >> > >> > that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team >> above. >> > The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after >> our >> > review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve >> > the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our >> > attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think >> you >> > get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service" >> > certificate or sth. similar. >> > >> > >> >>>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something >> >> first? >> >>>> - etc. >> >> >> > >> > If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first >> > come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not >> adding >> > them all? >> >> Heh, sorry, this wasn’t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list all >> of them, but who get’s to be on top of the list? (simple list randomisation >> per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here :) >> >> Jan >> -- >> >> >> > >> > So the list above does maybe miss one point: >> > >> > - who is going to test the service? >> > >> > >> >>>> >> >>>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache >> >> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that >> >> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :) >> >> >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just >> >> wanted to get a discussion around this going :) >> >>>> >> >>>> What do you think? >> >> >> > >> > Basically a very great idea imho. >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Andy >> > >> > -- >> > Andy Wenk >> > Hamburg - Germany >> > RockIt! >> > >> > GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588 >> > >> > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc >> >> -- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater
