search

erlef / infra-wg

ErlEF infrastructure working group
6 stars 1 forks source link

Request for infrastructure assistance with beam-companies.org #59

Open starbelly opened 3 years ago

starbelly commented 3 years ago

I've been thinking and discussing adhoc with Daniel Widgren about taking erlang-companies.org to beam-companies.org (which I own). Further, taking it to run on the nova framework. If all companies were to be included, this means a static app is problematic (i.e., searching through N entries where N > 500), thus the need for something like nova.

I'm thinking the infrastructure wg can help with this initiative. Specifically with providing a VM the app could run on and covering domain costs. Right now beam-companies.org is good for another two years as FYI, so that is not an immediate concern.

It should be duly noted that erlang-companies.org and the would-be beam-companies.org is a not for profit community driven effort.

benoitc commented 3 years ago

I've been thinking and discussing adhoc with Daniel Widgren about taking erlang-companies.org to beam-companies.org (which I own). Further, taking it to run on the nova framework. If all companies were to be included, this means a static app is problematic (i.e., searching through N entries where N > 500), thus the need for something like nova.

I'm thinking the infrastructure wg can help with this initiative. Specifically with providing a VM the app could run on and covering domain costs. Right now beam-companies.org is good for another two years as FYI, so that is not an immediate concern.

It should be duly noted that erlang-companies.org and the would-be beam-companies.org is a not for profit community driven effort.

what will be the license and how much time would it take? Could it enter a stipend program? I am happy to be the sherpa for it.

starbelly commented 3 years ago

@benoitc No one was thinking about doing a stipend, the support needed from the foundation would be quite minimal. Maybe you're thinking a stipend is the best way to go bout getting a budget for this? Literally, what the foundation would need to provide at least initially is a VM on vultr and perhaps pay up the domain for N years just so we wouldn't have to fool with it every year.

As for a license, not sure, Apache 2.0 or AGPL would be fine I believe. I would definitely want to talk with Sean and friends of elixir-companies to see if they have interest in this in some way, shape, or form.

benoitc commented 3 years ago

well since it’s an external project to the fondation, yes I think it should be a stipend driven by this WG. That makes ownerships and expectations simpler.

On the other hand if their a will to make this project part of the foundation (transfer its ownership) why not? there is no established process for it to my knowledge though….

On Wed 26 May 2021 at 02:25, Bryan Paxton @.***> wrote:

@benoitc https://github.com/benoitc No one was thinking about doing a stipend, the support needed from the foundation would be quite minimal. Maybe you're thinking a stipend is the best way to go bout getting a budget for this? Literally, what the foundation would need to provide at least initially is a VM on vultr and perhaps pay up the domain for N years just so we wouldn't have to fool with it every year.

As for a license, not sure, Apache 2.0 or AGPL would be fine I believe. I would definitely want to talk with Sean and friends of elixir-companies to see if they have interest in this in some way, shape, or form.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/erlef/infra-wg/issues/59#issuecomment-848368386, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAADRIRBKR3B5MYLFEELU63TPQ5V7ANCNFSM424GVL2Q .

-- Sent from my Mobile

starbelly commented 3 years ago

@benoitc I tried giving erlang-companies to the foundation when the foundation formed, there wasn't interest in it. I'm of course still open to it that as an option.

benoitc commented 3 years ago

@benoitc I tried giving erlang-companies to the foundation when the foundation formed, there wasn't interest in it. I'm of course still open to it that as an option.

Well this id a different topic indeed. But about your request I think this is this is something we need to clarify. If we provide/sponsor infrastructure for the projects we need to define our acceptance level as a group. To be able to eventually accept other projects. We need to define out limits of acceptance vs ownership. Roughly at least. So we can provide an answer to others projects.