if you write stuff like that, I feel you are effectively discouraging
people to praticipate in this test balloon.
We can switch to whatever fits best later on, but right now we should
see what people's reaction to this is - which might very well also be:
"I would prefer to fund through xyz".
If people do not want to fund Groovy development (at least the generic
"fund Java 9 compatibility" bounty/target should appeal to anyone
interested in the advancement of Groovy), then it does not matter what
funding platform you offer.
Funding by multiple people would already possible through the Jira
approach (just pledge in the comment section).
Splitting money between multiple contributors is a problem that we can
hopefully solve once there is some money to split.
On 11.03.2018 17:28, Daniel.Sun wrote:
BTW, each issue or feature can be sponsored by multiple people and can be
fixed by multiple volunteers. Compared with JIRA to record sponsorship
details, I prefer to use PR of Github. The groovy sponsorship project
repository can be setup at groovy/sponsorship of Github, which we should ask
Groovy project lead for approving.
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html