On 4 January 2011 19:20, Jon Seltzer seltzer1...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not update the funding from simple donation to a purchase of
clojure/core software like a refined version of the eclipse plugin or
some other incentive based approach? I think I understand why rich
might find 'donation'
I completely understand the Rich desire to keep flexibility and fun in
Clojure development. And I think it is important for the success of Clojure.
As for me a donation is much more about what is already done and enforces
little if any obligations.
I hope Rich will accept them from people who
On Nov 28, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
In Dec 2009, Rich asked the community to step up and support core
development -- and the community came through.
I'm interested in clojure, but not using it professionally yet. I was
wondering if funding for 2011 has already been worked out,
I was going to continue the funding effort, but have decided against it for
the reasons given here:
http://clojure.org/funding
Many thanks to those who participated,
I donated in 2010 and was going to donate for 2011 in a week's time. I
never had any sense of entitlement -- for a lot of
On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:31:13 -0500
Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 28, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
In Dec 2009, Rich asked the community to step up and support core
development -- and the community came through.
I'm interested in clojure, but not using it
2011/1/4 Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com
On Nov 28, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
In Dec 2009, Rich asked the community to step up and support core
development -- and the community came through.
I'm interested in clojure, but not using it professionally yet. I was
wondering if
Hi Rich,
On 4 January 2011 06:31, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to continue the funding effort, but have decided against it for
the reasons given here:
Regarding the entitlement [...] as to what I do with my time, I
believe I know of one of the discussions that lead you
On Jan 4, 2011, at 11:10 AM, Daniel Werner wrote:
Hi Rich,
On 4 January 2011 06:31, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to continue the funding effort, but have decided
against it for
the reasons given here:
Regarding the entitlement [...] as to what I do with my time, I
For what it's worth, I am really glad of the position Rich is taking
on a roadmap and Clojure's future development. I would much rather
Clojure remained fresh, innovative and agile, and that it continues to
offer unexpected, delightful new features and abilities. It can't
really do that if Rich
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Luke VanderHart
luke.vanderh...@gmail.com wrote:
For what it's worth, I am really glad of the position Rich is taking
on a roadmap and Clojure's future development. I would much rather
Clojure remained fresh, innovative and agile, and that it continues to
offer
Why must many pay for some?
I'm certain that of all the contributions you had, there are only an
handful of people who don't understand what a donation is. So with
that in mind what is the rational for this kind of action?
I mean, you never said that if we donated you would implement our
ideas
Why not update the funding from simple donation to a purchase of
clojure/core software like a refined version of the eclipse plugin or
some other incentive based approach? I think I understand why rich
might find 'donation' approach a bit uncomfortable.
On Jan 4, 2:24 pm, Mark Engelberg
On Nov 28, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
In Dec 2009, Rich asked the community to step up and support core
development -- and the community came through.
I'm interested in clojure, but not using it professionally yet. I was
wondering if funding for 2011 has already been worked out,
In Dec 2009, Rich asked the community to step up and support core
development -- and the community came through.
I'm interested in clojure, but not using it professionally yet. I was
wondering if funding for 2011 has already been worked out, or if it is
an open question?
I'd be happy to
14 matches
Mail list logo
