guidoaben
commented
1 year ago Godspeed. I'm entirely in favour.
On 14 March 2023 3:45:37 pm GMT+01:00, Michiel de Jong @.***> wrote:
As discussed at the CS3 2023 conference last week, I offer myself as a contact point for applying for funding to help improve our documentation, specification, test suite, and ultimately also OCM itself.
I already spoke with @schiessle, Jakub Moscicki, @glpatcern, @gmgigi96, @labkode, @smesterheide, @andreasfk and @guidoaben about this at the conference and I got the impression (but correct me if I'm wrong) that we all think this is a good idea. Not everybody needs funding, so some people could just add their name as an "advisor" instead of as a team member, or maybe you approve but don't want to link your name to OCM, or to this particular initiative to do some more work on OCM now, that's also fine.
CC also @LovisaLugnegard and @ishank011 from https://github.com/cs3org/OCM-API/graphs/contributors. Is anyone missing from this list who we should ping about this?
I was thinking of applying for a 50,000 euro grant from https://nlnet.nl/entrust/ (deadline: 1 April). I can create a first draft text and maybe we can have a video call some time next week to discuss it. I'll also ping each of you individually so we can determine who wants to be involved in which way, and put together a team and some milestones we want to work on.
I think the main goal would be to:
- improve the documentation (for instance, write the spec down properly, in RFC style)
- improve the test suite (it's still mostly manual at this point)
- describe optional features (a number of interesting routes to explore have been proposed)
I think an anti-goal would be to redesign OCM in a way that's incompatible with what exists now. So if you just implement OCM or use it in any way, then hopefully this activity will either benefit you, or it will leave your situation as it is. Given the open nature of this protocol we just want to help improve the quality of the work that already exists, we don't want to end up hijacking or breaking it in any way! :)
-- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cs3org/OCM-API/issues/67 You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Message ID: @.***>
andreasfk
michielbdejong
glpatcern
As discussed at the CS3 2023 conference last week, I offer myself as a contact point for applying for funding to help improve our documentation, specification, test suite, and ultimately also OCM itself.
I already spoke with @schiessle, @moscicki , @glpatcern, @gmgigi96, @labkode, @smesterheide, @andreasfk and @guidoaben about this at the conference and I got the impression (but correct me if I'm wrong) that we all think this is a good idea. Not everybody needs funding, so some people could just add their name as an "advisor" instead of as a team member, or maybe you approve but don't want to link your name to OCM, or to this particular initiative to do some more work on OCM now, that's also fine.
CC also @LovisaLugnegard and @ishank011 from https://github.com/cs3org/OCM-API/graphs/contributors. Is anyone missing from this list who we should ping about this?
I was thinking of applying for a 50,000 euro grant from https://nlnet.nl/entrust/ (deadline: 1 April). I can create a first draft text and maybe we can have a video call some time next week to discuss it. I'll also ping each of you individually so we can determine who wants to be involved in which way, and put together a team and some milestones we want to work on.
I think the main goal would be to:
I think an anti-goal would be to redesign OCM in a way that's incompatible with what exists now. So if you just implement OCM or use it in any way, then hopefully this activity will either benefit you, or it will leave your situation as it is. Given the open nature of this protocol we just want to help improve the quality of the work that already exists, we don't want to end up hijacking or breaking it in any way! :)