Responsibilities of PyCon APAC community #4
Conversation
2 points in my PR here: 1. Let's be clear on the responsibilities that the PyCon APAC _committee_ will hold, which gives it the _right_ to endorse certain parties to hold the conference 1. Although I get what this is trying to do, as we're not a registered legal entity ourselves, I do not think it is appropriate to set as a requirement that the organizers are also registered entities. This also needlessly raises the bar for new comers: Nearly of us started our PyCon adventure as individuals getting together and that didn't make the conference less good as compared to with a legal entity.
| @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ help run PyCon Asia Pacific in 2017 in a location they are local to. PyCon APAC | |||
| Asia-Pacific countries to come together to meet with fellow Python users. The | |||
| same can be said for anyone adopting an exploratory perspective towards Python. | |||
|
|
|||
| The above text proposes that a certain group 'owns' PyCon APAC. The below text also puts forth certain rules and requirements which would-be organizers needs to adhere to before they can be _considered_ as eligable to organize PyCon APAC. If we endorse a certain party, I think we also need to be clear on the responsibility that we hold as the party that endorses a certain organizer. We cannot just say "yes, you can hold PyCon APAC" but do not follow through on issues that might occur after that. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better break this to multiple lines. It'll make commenting easier.
This paragraph doesn't look like part of the document, but your comment for the document, @iq8al ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, those are my comments, which should be overwritten with the real text if we can come to a conclusion @yungyuc
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I prefer to put comments and discussions in github issue/PR tracker. In this way the document itself remains self-contained.
If we really want to put our comments into the document, we should explicitly mark it. Because I don't like this idea, I am not proposing a format. But I think such a format should include a clear todo mark (XXX, FIXME, etc.) and a the commenter's identity.
@iq8al could you go with either way (or another option you like) in your next update of this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, the issue tracker is there to be used anyway, so comments will go there instead. Proposal to editing the document can go as PR then.
2 points in my PR here: