On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
Actually, the vote was kind of withdrawn to update it to new descriptors.
Thus, its not available yet. In anycase, no need to spam all the PMCs,
especially those not using Maven. Just keep an eye on the annou...@maven
On 12 Nov 2009, at 03:16, Greg Stein wrote:
Not a strong opinion, but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change and discussing it. But
Ian Boston schrieb:
not least because committed mistakes demand fixing by the committer
and then anyone who can fix the bug. The only downside is that
occasionally trunk wont build/run and if trunk is close to production
that probably matters.
I think another downside is, that (maybe
Michael Wechner wrote:
Ian Boston schrieb:
not least because committed mistakes demand fixing by the committer
and then anyone who can fix the bug. The only downside is that
occasionally trunk wont build/run and if trunk is close to production
that probably matters.
I think another
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Not a strong opinion, but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Not a strong opinion, but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change
Why not sent it through bo...@? All Chairs are subscribed to that
list, several board members have in the past raised concerns about the
releases created using maven. This would unequivocally show that maven
has delivered a working solution, and notify all PMC chairs of the
general Apache
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 08:44 +0100, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I think part of Cassandra's problem is that they do releases directly
from trunk and don't have a 'stable' et al branch.
No, this isn't (has never been) true.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/branches/
The
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
I assume you're referring to Jonathan Ellis and myself, and I'm not sure
that's exactly fair. There are
On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 22:16 -0500, Greg Stein wrote:
Not a strong opinion, but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change and discussing
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
and since then 99% of the
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
I agree with you, but tabled my protest because in practice what we have
is working, doesn't seem to be a barrier to contribution, and everyone
seems happy
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
...
I agree with this, and as a Cassandra committer I have in the past
protested our use of RTC. However, the current work-flow *in practice*
is more about having someone, anyone, give changes a once over (making
sure they
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
I assume you're referring to
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
It's a long tail sort of thing.
We follow the convention Johan suggested of assigning
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
...
I agree with this, and as a Cassandra committer I have in the past
protested our use of RTC. However, the current work-flow *in practice*
is more
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
It's a long
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:36 -0500, Greg Stein wrote:
I agree with you, but tabled my protest because in practice what we
have is working, doesn't seem to be a barrier to contribution, and
everyone seems happy with it (even the casual contributors).
I wouldn't say everyone. This whole
On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
1) Relax the exit criteria: Especially the diversity requirement is a
major barrier for many projects. There have been various calls to
relax the diversity
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:55 AM, ant elder antel...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
by
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:18, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
how to work here at Apache.
It is not about making podlings thoughtlessly
Eric Evans wrote:
Sure, but the IPMC is in a position of power, and can impose it's will
upon the project (including CTR vs. RTC), right?
I have no clue whether the IPMC can impose such a decision. But I'm
very, very certain that it should not even consider trying. It's better
to ask the
It looks like we might be moving the code repository over on
Sunday(!). Thus, my query about source code placement has a finite
window for further discussion :-)
Over the past two days, it sounds like nobody has any particular
object to the svn code being loaded directly to /subversion. (yes, it
Thanks, and yes: agreed on the rationale.
And have no fears. We aren't going to back out. And I'm not seeing
that the ASF would boot us. So that just means we need to work through
it :-)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 19:17, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Greg
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44, Matthieu Riou matthieu.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
so about 6 months ago
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44, Matthieu Riou matthieu.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com
wrote:
2009/11/10 Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com:
3) Increase the amount of mentoring: The lack of mentor time and
better (not necessarily more) supporting documentation gives
unnecessary administrational and procedural headaches (failed release
votes, etc.) to many podlings.
Without more
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:16 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Not a strong opinion, but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change
Yup. We have all had different experiences, and I certainly
acknowledge it is possible to have a successful RTC model in place.
The real problem is that there is always a success story for any
position. See? It works here. And there are *so* many factors that
go into that success, beyond the
Forgot to list the Infrastructure ticket, in case you would like to
follow the migration more closely:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2321
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 13:41, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like we might be moving the code repository over on
Sunday(!).
Joe Schaefer asked if he could set up the mailing lists this weekend.
The discussion seemed to end, with no particular opposition, so I
filed an Infrastructure ticket to track the creation of the mailing
lists:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2324
At this time, we're setting up just
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
Not sure what else you're looking for.
I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
based on an existing 1.6.x release, I wouldn't expect it to be fully
compliant
On Nov 12, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
Not sure what else you're looking for.
I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
based on an existing
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 22:05, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
Not sure what else you're looking for.
I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
Greg Stein wrote:
If you want to review *bits* rather than *release process*, then you
can take a look at trunk/ or the nightlies that we'll soon produce. If
you want release process *and* Apache-branding, then the svn community
is not prepared to provide that, nor do I think it necessary
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 00:14, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
...
On your other subject, svn and lists and site at subversion.apache.org, that
is a problem but not insurmountable.
If we move 1) the lists to subversion.apache.org [it's just a discussion,
right? Only publicized
Greg Stein wrote:
We're not sure what we'd like to do about website migration right now.
Discussion is still occurring in the community.
The bottom line is that we are in sync in terms of what aught to move into
ASF and have 'formal recognition' ASAP. E.g. a mailing list is trivial,
svn is
For unrelated reasons, I today split out the Apache-ness part of the Maven
release process (still syncing):
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
It could still use more work, but that's all I have time for right now if
someone wants to patch it (eg, to explain the
38 matches
Mail list logo
