Hi Paul,

> (1) Since we don't use the "groovy/groovy-core" repo any longer, I don't
> think that is the correct one to use but rather "apache/groovy". 

     As you said in (2), `According to official Apache policy, the ASF
doesn't accept "cash for code"`, I am not sure we can create open collective
for "apache/groovy"(BTW, I can not access "apache/groovy" via my github
account).
     If we can not use "apache/groovy" to create open collective,
"groovy/groovy-core" may be better, but we have to explain the reason in the
open collective.

> Also, while the Android Groovy Gradle plugin is no doubt a worthy
> recipient of additional funds, I would be inclined to keep it simple and
> focus on core Groovy for now. 
     Agreed.

> this would need to be a community-driven effort rather than an official
> Apache organised activity

     Yep. That's the reason why I sent the email via my personal hotmail. 

> The wording could say "Friends of Groovy", or "All Things Groovy" (to
> mimic the facebook group) or "Gr8 Technologies" rather than "Apache Groovy
> project" or similar. 

     "I would be inclined to keep it simple and focus on core Groovy for
now. ",  I think wording focuses on core Groovy would be better, e.g.
"Groovy Programming Language"?

>  I suspect, we (as the Apache project) would need to maintain oversight of
> the collective to make sure of this. As far as I know this is slightly
> uncharted territory. 

     The opencollective site will record all "contribute" and "submit
expense", which is open to all people, e.g.
https://opencollective.com/vuejs#budget

> (4) While sponsorship is below what we'd like and below what it has been
> at some previous points in Groovy life, it isn't 0. We have several
> existing sponsors, e.g. OCI. The wording about the collective should take
> that into consideration. 

     Yep. OCI is a great company for Groovy! We always appreciate its
sponsorship.

      Let's imagine that would be really great if more people involve into
developing Groovy, more big features(e.g. MOP2, async/await) are completed
and hard issues(e.g. generics of STC) are fixed every year :-)

Cheers,
Daniel.Sun



--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html

Reply via email to