On 20 Dec 2005, at 04:10, David Crossley wrote:
With the advent of new documentation management tools
(e.g. Lenya, JackRabbit, Daisy) and their potential
use by ASF projects for their project documentation,
we are seeing questions about how to enable the
storage of the sources for
On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 11:49:14PM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Please vote on the following:
New mailing lists should be created under the
@incubator.apache.org domain, just as all of
the other project resources, e.g., the web
site and SVN subtree.
+0
(...)
There has been some
Trustin Lee wrote:
2005/12/20, David Crossley [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
...
The current operating principle is that we store all
source content in the official revision control system.
Some people have said that that is a dictate.
That includes everything: code, configuration files,
source content
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 04:19:21PM -0800, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Give me a break.
No. The incubator PMC has given breaks before and it let to undesired
side effects so now we're not going to do that anymore.
I'm not trying to hide anything.
In general, when discussing policy or a general
-0 for the same reason as Cliff; I'd much rather folks not have to
change mail lists (even if its not hard for infrastructure to
change). There is already a status file so its obvious to anyone who
cares what the status is of a project, I don't see why we need to
force email addresses to
Adam
I offer to help mentor this.
Paul
--
Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oxygenating the Web Service Platform, www.wso2.com
On 12/20/05, Adam Peller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework
I'm very interested in this.
Even though I am not an Apache member (so no potential mentor ;) I'd
be very interested in what this project means for the Apache
MyFaces-javascript and AJAX integration.
regards,
Martin
On 12/20/05, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adam
I offer to help
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
Also, this proposal pops up
David Crossley wrote:
[...]
There are two separate issues in that item.
One is moving the SVN repository or asking
infra@ to move it.
The other is amending the svn-authorization files
to provide access to the newly-named repositories.
The project PMC chair or other mentor can do that
and there
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
Yes.
Hi Martin.
Although I confess to know little about MyFaces, I'd imagine your AJAX
components could work well within our tooling environment and that custom
extensions to support them are possible. Out of the box (or with minimal
effort, at least) you should get some integrated JS support in
On Dec 20, 2005, at 2:13 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 04:19:21PM -0800, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Give me a break.
No. The incubator PMC has given breaks before and it let to
undesired
side effects so now we're not going to do that anymore.
I'm not trying to hide anything.
Leo Simons wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Changing a mailing list is stil painful further downstream.
Eg with the MARC archive or mail-archive.com or gmane or
whatever.
We don't support any of those. We provide the raw and mod_mbox archives,
and those are what we support. As you said, there
Sylvain -
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
So the questions are:
- is the ASF the place for Eclipse extensions? I don't deny the ability
to _existing_ project to host their tooling, but this isn't the case here.
The framework is composed of tools that happen to use Eclipse for a
runtime, much like
Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
the org.apache package?
Regards,
Alan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes :)
-- dims
On 12/20/05, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
the org.apache package?
Regards,
Alan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
On Dec 20, 2005, at 1:09 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Offering an alternate proposal as part of a vote thread after the
discussion
has taken place already where one did not participate *is*
anything else by
the way. What I didn't like is the very fact that someone out-of-
the-blue proposes
It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always took
for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had the
need to codify it...
On Dec 20, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move
to the
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We don't support any of those.
Who's we? As a user, I still prefer marc over mail-archives a real lot
and am happy about any Apache project that's available on Marc.
But, actually, I replied because your response made me angry. You
(choose between You as in We, or
Sam Ruby wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly
about a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra
library that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like
On 12/20/05, Jochen Wiedmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We don't support any of those.
Who's we?
The Apache Software Foundation. Those other archives are maintained outside
of the ASF, by people who most likely have no affiliation with the ASF.
Therefore, the ASF
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
- why incubate an Ajax library that none of the current ASF projects
uses nor plans to use, unless I missed something?
It is a valid question, but it is also valid to point out that the
ASF has projects as diverse as TCL and SpamAssassin.
The situation is very
Adam,
Can you tell me if you considered proposing this to the Eclipse Foundation?
Since this project appears to have far stronger dependencies on
Eclipse Foundation projects rather than anything from Apache, can you
tell me why you think bringing this project here is likely to help you
build a
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Changing a mailing list is stil painful further downstream.
Eg with the MARC archive or mail-archive.com or gmane or
whatever.
We don't support any of those. We provide the raw and mod_mbox archives,
and those are what
I have a more specific question: have you guys considered separating
this into a plug-ins/tooling donation to Eclipse, and a runtime
donation to Apache? It seems like the IP is already in a form that
makes this easy (ie, the AJAX Toolkit Framework Eclipse plugins from
IBM, and the AjaxTK
Of course, the answer may not be that simple if you have an existing
user base that programs against your APIs.
I think it would be wise to do this as soon as possible and judge the
impact. We found we had to write a couple of compatibility interfaces
under the old package scheme to retain binary
Right - I would assume you provide some kind of adapter package so
existing code works, and deprecate it...
On Dec 20, 2005, at 5:12 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
Of course, the answer may not be that simple if you have an existing
user base that programs against your APIs.
I think it would be
It's been 6 days since the introduction to this project at ApacheCon, and two
weeks, today, since it was proposed.
Votes +1; wrowe, mads, jerenkrantz, jimjag
Votes -1; [none]
I'll give this one last day to stew, and without further objection, will call
the vote and begin creating the
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 09:03 -0500, Adam Peller wrote:
Hi Adam! Haven't run into you since the early BSF days .. boy that was
like 7 years ago??! Looks like you're doing well and keeping busy ...
good!
I have some questions on the proposal:
The AJAX Toolkit Framework will provide a strategic
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 18:27 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
Adam can certainly speak to the technical aspects of this than I can,
but AJAX certainly causes one to rethink the traditional client/server
boundary, in fact it tends to blur it. One can pick off small pieces
and say this definately
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:14:22PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
How is that puzzling?
-Original Message-
Now to directly Cliff's question: yes, we considered
proposing this to Eclipse. And we talked with a number of
people there. And surprisingly enough - we thought those
discussions were settled but they seem to have sprung back up
again after Adam sent in
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
[snip]
(I appreciate that you were not directly engaged with Eclipse prior to this
proposal being made public.)
[snip]
The last talk we had with IBM concerning this project was on October 20th
First, thank you very much for posting posting here. I'm confident
In particular, why would taking Solomon's advice and dividing
the child in half be benefitial (sic) to anybody?
Interesting question. So your assertion is that all open source code should
be done at Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in which another
open source community can or
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
So your assertion is that all open source code should be
done at Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in
which another open source community can or should attempt
to co-operate with Apache?
I don't believe that Sam said anything of the sort.
Solomon has
Mike,
Some one comes to ASF with a proposal, typically we give it our full
consideration. I can understand why cliff asked about eclipse option
(Beehive/Eclipse stuff!), but i can understand Adam/Sam's view
completely as I am on the ASL 2.0 is good band-wagon and i do want
ASF's stamp on
Hey Sanjiva! Yeah, it's been a while. I've been trying to follow your
projects and blogs over the years. Sounds like all is going well.
No secret agendas here :) Happy to answer.
So this may not be an appropriate part of the discussion for deciding
whether to accept this for incubation or
So your assertion is that all open source code should be done at
Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in which another open
source community can or should attempt to co-operate with Apache?
I don't believe that Sam said anything of the sort.
Really? I am truly not meaning to be
Some comments:
1) This appears to be two proposals rolled into one. One is to incubate a
JavaScript toolkit. (It's not clear to me at this point whether or not that
toolkit includes a server-side component, but that's not really relevant at
this point.) The other is to incubate a development
Please pardon me for being blunt, I don't really care about
what happens inside IBM/Eclipse or who said what/when.
Dims,
Trust me, no one hates that bullshit more than I. I was just reacting to
Sam's assertion that Eclipse was fully informed and happy with outcome and
wanted to be precise
On Dec 20, 2005, at 10:32 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
It's rather like saying what the heck is the Apache web server
doing with a
JVM project?
I say that about once a week these days ;)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Got it! thanks
-- dims
On 12/20/05, Mike Milinkovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please pardon me for being blunt, I don't really care about
what happens inside IBM/Eclipse or who said what/when.
Dims,
Trust me, no one hates that bullshit more than I. I was just reacting to
Sam's
I think it's been mentioned a couple of times, so I'll try to clarify what
Zimbra is about. Zimbra is primarily a client-side AJAX toolkit. There is
a small server-side component, currently implemented as JSPs (though we've
hacked up a PHP-based version as well as proof of concept) The server
On 12/20/05, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike,
Some one comes to ASF with a proposal, typically we give it our full
consideration. I can understand why cliff asked about eclipse option
(Beehive/Eclipse stuff!),
Actually, I had two purposes behind my question. One was to learn
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 23:18 -0500, Adam Peller wrote:
2) The other subproject is Zimbra itself, but there may be other runtimes
here as well. As you say, the main goal here is to provide layers of
abstraction to hide the traditional browser tricks and quirk modes to make
browser-based
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 22:10 -0800, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
My second reason for asking was as a polite gesture towards the
Eclipse Foundation, being another respectable, non-profit, open source
organization.
I have ABSOLUTELY nothing against the Eclipse Foundation or their
products; I'm myself
46 matches
Mail list logo
