groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alessio Stalla <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL]About creating open collective for Groovy programming language in the name of Groovy Community
Date Fri, 11 Jan 2019 08:44:32 GMT
For 4. (sponsoring individual developers and encouraging developers to
participate) have you considered BountySource?

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 00:46, MG <> wrote:

> Some thoughts from my side:
>    1. Do we know of any other ASF projects who gathers donations ? Would
>    be surprising if we were the first to face these questions...
>    2. Also wondering if the following would avoid legal pitfalls: Ask for
>    donations for "The Groovy Language", an abstract language concept, which
>    has as reference implementation "Apache Groovy" on the JVM platform ?
>    3. If Open Collective is bound to a GitHub repo etc, then  going with
>    a Patreon o.s. might be the obvious alternative with looser coupling to
>    trademarks.
>    4. Another idea would be to sponsor individual developers directly. I
>    know my son's (American) football team had something like that for their
>    European league level players at some point. I know this does not align
>    completely with Daniel's intentions of getting more people to actively
>    participate, but since it is very similar to a company paying a Groovy
>    developer, it would probably avoid all legal pitfalls.
> Cheers,
> mg
> Am 10.01.2019 um 09:20 schrieb Cédric Champeau:
> My 2 cents: as a Groovy enthusiast, I like the idea and support it. As a
> Groovy committer and PMC member, however, I have some things to say.
> First, it's not very different to have one company paying one developer
> full time to develop Groovy and contribute features than it is to have a
> collective "sponsoring" Groovy. The process of integration is the same: we,
> as PMC members, must make sure neutrality is followed and that no entity is
> coercing Groovy for its own needs. That's why we try to have PMC members
> from different companies. Second, Groovy is a brand name owned by the ASF.
> As such, you should not use "Apache Groovy" without asking for permission
> from legal. It should also be extremely clear that this collective is not
> affiliated with the ASF in any way. The best way for me to do it is that
> effectively no PMC member, and no committer is part of the collective,
> otherwise there's a conflict of interest. Especially, the ASF itself is
> looking for donations, and donations MUST NOT be directed at a specific
> project. There are good reasons for this (in particular, we all benefit
> from the same infrastructure, the same member affiliation, as any other
> project). So it's clear to be that this collective must not be affiliated
> to Groovy. Should you need sponsorship for developing Groovy, feel free to
> do it, but it should never mention that it's an Apache thing. This can make
> it rather complicated with open collective as it requires a GitHub
> repository with stars. I feel you will NOT be allowed to use
> `apache/groovy` for the reasons I described. `groovy/groovy` is an old
> repo, and in any case, the ASF may want to make sure its trademarks are
> respected by preventing you to use this repository.
> Said differently: I like the idea, but you need to find a way to do it
> which doesn't involve trademarks or ASF ownership.
> Le jeu. 10 janv. 2019 à 02:05, Daniel.Sun <> a écrit :
>> My pleasure :-)
>> Once the open collective created, we will discuss the rules to encourage
>> people to involve the development of Groovy. They have no time on Groovy
>> during work time and may be tired after work, but maybe they want to earn
>> additional money for some reason.
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel.Sun
>> -----
>> Apache Groovy committer
>> Blog:
>> Twitter: @daniel_sun
>> --
>> Sent from:

View raw message