On Aug 30, 2012, at 6:48 AM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
I'm sincerely sorry to ask this and I have my own answers, but why continue
STDCXX when such negativity from Apache is apparent..
What negativity are you seeing? I'm not seeing any, certainly
nothing that is
On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:36 AM, Martin Sebor mse...@gmail.com wrote:
There's always good traffic when this topic comes up. Thanks
to Jim who's made it his mission to pull the plug on STDCXX.
I think this must be his third or fourth proposal to vote the
project into the attic.
No, it's not
On Aug 30, 2012, at 5:45 PM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
---
The facts as I know it
1) Our fork is maintained (continuous bug fixes - which we won't submit to
Apache now)
Why?
2) Stefan is putting in some work (one man army)
Hardly a healthy community if just 1
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
While STDCXX is at Apache it will never be BSD licensed. Solution - move it
away from Apache foundation and have them transfer some of the additional
rights they received to allow recipient foundation to relicense. I
On 08/31/12 07:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
While STDCXX is at Apache it will never be BSD licensed. Solution - move it
away from Apache foundation and have them transfer some of the additional
rights they received to
On 08/31/12 08:18, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 30, 2012, at 5:45 PM, C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
[...]
STDCXX isn't some stupid ass java framework or widget - It's a *critical* part
of a C++ stack and the cost of leaving it out of the attic is negligible -
What's the benefit
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:43 AM, C. Bergström
cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 08/31/12 07:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com
wrote:
While STDCXX is at Apache it will never be BSD licensed. Solution - move
it away from Apache
2012/8/31 Stefan Teleman stefan.tele...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Pavel Heimlich, a.k.a. hajma
tropikha...@gmail.com wrote:
well, it's half year since revival of the project was announced and has
there been any progress/improvements? The state of this is a koma at best.
The idea that ALv2 projects can't be added to FreeBSD ports is complete and
total hogwash. Pure FUD.
On Aug 31, 2012, at 8:43 AM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 08/31/12 07:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 09/ 1/12 01:17 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The idea that ALv2 projects can't be added to FreeBSD ports is complete and
total hogwash. Pure FUD.
Thanks for the top post and your view... Can you actually address the
issue and question?
On Aug 31, 2012, at 8:43 AM, C.
On 09/ 1/12 01:28 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot push stdcxx as part
of the FreeBSD ports collection. And that is because it is licensed
under ALv2.
My response is that that suggestion is total hogwash.
That's not an authoritative response - To help
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:41 PM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 09/ 1/12 01:28 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot push stdcxx as part
of the FreeBSD ports collection. And that is because it is licensed
under ALv2.
My response is that that
On 09/ 1/12 02:01 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:41 PM, C. Bergströmcbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 09/ 1/12 01:28 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot push stdcxx as part
of the FreeBSD ports collection. And that is because it is licensed
On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
On 08/29/12 10:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
I'm sincerely sorry to ask this and I have my own answers, but why
continue STDCXX when such negativity from Apache is apparent..
Will Apache consider passing along some/all of it's CLA granted
rights/additional permissions to another foundation that hosts open
source projects?
or
Why not
On 08/30/12 06:38, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Liviu Nicoaranikko...@hates.ms wrote:
The discussion back in February showed that, even though committers have not
spent much time lately contributing new code to it, there is an active review
of the activity occurring on
On 08/30/12 06:48, C. Bergström wrote:
I'm sincerely sorry to ask this and I have my own answers, but why continue
STDCXX when such negativity from Apache is apparent..
AFAICT, the Apache Foundation has been a good host for STDCXX during these
years. They have provided a framework for STDCXX
On 08/30/12 08:56, C. Bergström wrote:
On 08/30/12 07:29 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
AFAICT, the Apache Foundation has been a good host for STDCXX during these
years. They have provided a framework [...] in accordance to their principles
about what constitutes a healthy software project.
I
On Aug 30, 2012 2:58 PM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 08/30/12 07:29 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
On 08/30/12 06:48, C. Bergström wrote:
I'm sincerely sorry to ask this and I have my own answers, but why
continue STDCXX when such negativity from Apache is apparent..
AFAICT,
On 08/31/12 03:10 AM, Pavel Heimlich, a.k.a. hajma wrote:
2) Posting the project is dead on a public list certainly doesn't help grow a
community
well, it's half year since revival of the project was announced and has
there been any progress/improvements? The state of this is a koma at best.
On Aug 30, 2012, at 5:45 PM, C. Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On 08/31/12 03:10 AM, Pavel Heimlich, a.k.a. hajma wrote:
2) Posting the project is dead on a public list certainly doesn't help grow
a community
well, it's half year since revival of the project was announced and
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
On 08/31/12 06:43 AM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
While I recognize the value of each one of the points you make, I am puzzled
as to why you are not going forward on your way with your fork? How is the
Apache Foundation keeping you from making
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
who feels that the project should still exist *and* is willing
to stand as chair?
On 08/29/12 10:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
who feels that the project should still exist *and* is willing
to stand as
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
On 08/29/12 10:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
On 08/29/12 10:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
26 matches
Mail list logo
