A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations
Salvador de la Puente González
salva at unoyunodiez.com
Mon Jun 6 10:21:38 UTC 2016
Excuse my ignorance, but why do we need the legal organization, why to not
simply do the GiHub part?
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:36 AM, G. Kay Lee <
balancetraveller+es-discuss at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Allen, thanks for extending your support :-D
> My observation as well as belief is that, if a community effort has turned
> out to be successful, than volunteers will flock together and the movement
> / organization will be able to self-sustain for quite long enough. So the
> issue has always been how to make sure a community effort is on the right
> track toward success from the get-go.
> For this specific effort, at this specific stage, I think what we need
> right now is to add more credibility to this whole endeavor (since I'm not
> a familiar, high-profile figure), so I'm going to spend some time doing
> research to put forward a more concrete plain written down in plain text,
> and just go ahead with it. I believe with each progress we'll eventually
> attract more interested parties and once we garner enough attention and
> participation, we'll solve the "not-enough-time" problem. Hopefully. We'll
> see ;-)
> Again, very glad to receive your support. Will keep you posted whenever
> there's some new progress.
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>
>> I think this is a very interesting idea. TC39 has put a lot of effort
>> into community transparency over the last decade but Ecma International
>> (really most international standards organization) is organizationally not
>> structured or naturally inclined to directly accept “contributions” from
>> individual. Changing this within Ecma has been and will continue to be a
>> slow and sometimes frustrating process. The idea of a NFP joining Ecma as
>> a community surrogate is an interacting way to approach the problem. I
>> think it could work.
>> However, while the idea is simple enough the actual process of building
>> and sustaining such a NFP is not so simple. Kevin Smith has already raised
>> some very valid cautions about this. In particular, his cautions about the
>> amount personal time required of you (or any other individuals sharing
>> leadership respondability of the NFP) should not be ignored.
>> But, I think this really could be a viable solution if you and other
>> organizers of the NFP are sufficiently motivated and committed.
>> I’d happy to act as an adviser as you try to get this organizers.
>> PS, you might find this provides some useful background on TC39
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss