groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul King <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community
Date Tue, 08 Jan 2019 10:54:25 GMT
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:35 PM Daniel Sun <> wrote:

> 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"

I am not sure either but why not find out for sure? If we (with community
hats on) can, that would be ideal. I will try to find out the right person
to ask.

> (BTW, I can not access "apache/groovy" via my github account).

I haven't set mine up either but I believe you can use two factor
authentication now that we are using gitbox:

>      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 think it needs to be clear up front that it's not associated with Apache
just "Groovy Programming Language" while not exactly "Apache Groovy project"
I suspect isn't clear enough. That's why I suggested "Friends of Groovy".

>  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.

True, that might be enough. We'll have to ask. It does raise the other
question though of how expenses will be approved?

> > (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 :-)

Totally agree with you, just suggesting the wording used is sensitive to
existing players. I can help craft wording if needed.

> Cheers,
> Daniel.Sun
> --
> Sent from:

View raw message