It's related. Commons are sponsoring this incubation.
Hen
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Matthias Wessendorf mat...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
what about the effort from the Jakarta/Commons Validator community?
Aren't they doing that as well ? (or was it only stated to do so)?
-Matthias
On
hi all,
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Gianugo Rabellino gian...@gmail.com wrote:
None of the above issues is a blocker, but the sum of the parts
doesn't give me exactly a warm, fuzzy feeling. I would appreciate the
proponents having a discussion with Chemistry first. If OpenCMIS,
however,
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:56 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
A quick search so there has been some discussion on commons-dev - [1]
Does this really need to be incubated - the proposal says its intended
to graduate to Apache Commons and replace the existing Validator 1.x
component as
Dear HISE Developers,
This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator
PMC.
It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
board report.
The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 16 December 2009, 2 pm Pacific. The
report
for your
Dear Clerezza Developers,
This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator
PMC.
It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
board report.
The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 16 December 2009, 2 pm Pacific. The
report
for your
Hi;
This is a reminder email that 72 hours have already passed.
What other IPMC members think about graduation? So far we have three
binding +1 votes from
Kevan Miller,
Matthias Wessendorf,
Bertrand Delacretaz
Thanks;
--Gurkan
2009/12/7 Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
Hi;
After
+1
Niall
2009/12/11 Gurkan Erdogdu cgurkanerdo...@gmail.com:
Hi;
This is a reminder email that 72 hours have already passed.
What other IPMC members think about graduation? So far we have three
binding +1 votes from
Kevan Miller,
Matthias Wessendorf,
Bertrand Delacretaz
Thanks;
+1
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi;
After over one years in the incubator with providing three
releases
OpenWebBeans community with the support of our mentors feel that we
are
ready to propose to the Incubator
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:56 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
A quick search so there has been some discussion on commons-dev - [1]
Does this really need to be incubated - the proposal says its intended
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
- Original Message
From: ant elder antel...@apache.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 5:22:13 AM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation
On
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Todd Lipcon t...@cloudera.com wrote:
Hi Kevan,
Responses below:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the license for the file: doc/thrift.tex?
This was contributed by Facebook, and thus falls under the
- Original Message
From: Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 6:29:26 AM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
-
Hudson build machine accounts are created upon request for members of
(P)PMCs.
Does the Cassandra project have a PPMC? I don't see one in the
asf-authorization file, and have a request from Eric for an account [1].
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2362
Thanks,
Tim
Hi Stefane,
I'm not sure I get your point. If OpenCMIS would become a top level subproject
within Chemistry (which is what Florent suggested) then those two topics would
still remain. It would be even worse: Chemistry would then have two client APIs
which would be really confusing.
The only
On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:00 PM, Florent Guillaume wrote:
My earlier recommendation to Paul and Florian, and my recommendation
today, is that, if incubating is deemed the better choice, OpenCMIS
become a top level directory under the Chemistry codebase. The earlier
the two codebases are brought
Same for me (if I understand your opinion correctly): we shouldn't
have OpenCMIS competing with a subproject of Chemistry, because it
will have a negative impact both internally (on project developers)
and externally (on project customers):
1. Internally: duplication of effort, instead of
On Dec 11, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Florian Müller wrote:
Hi Stefane,
I'm not sure I get your point. If OpenCMIS would become a top level
subproject within Chemistry (which is what Florent suggested) then
those two topics would still remain. It would be even worse:
Chemistry would then have
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Florian Müller fmuel...@opentext.com wrote:
The only way to overcome this is to merge the OpenCMIS code into the
Chemistry code base. But the technical approaches of the projects are so
different that this might not work - at least not in the short term.
I
Hi Chemistry,
I understand the concerns you might have and the confusion we have caused. But
please do not forget that Open in Open Source has a meaning. So I am not sure
that all the comments I read here are in accordance with the idea of it. So
before you just say No please think about
- If
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
I compared opencmis-provider-api to chemistry-api. While there are
differences in design (granularity of interfaces, type safety, etc.),
the fundamental architecture is the same for both projects. This is as
expected
On Dec 11, 2009, at 5:28 PM, Jens Hübel wrote:
Hi Chemistry,
I understand the concerns you might have and the confusion we have
caused. But please do not forget that Open in Open Source has a
meaning. So I am not sure that all the comments I read here are in
accordance with the idea of
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
...More seriously, let's not attack each other's conception of open source,
and
focus on the question at hand
+1
...Everyone, member of the open source community or not, is free to start a
new
implementation of
Good points, which we discussed some on the d...@commns list before
asking the Commons PMC to sponsor this as an Incubator project.
My concerns, were around brining in a new codebase that previously had
one maintainer, but not offering them committership from the beginning,
which seemed to
Hi Jukka,
In the end the APIs should be somewhat similar since they are implementing the
same spec.
But you are actually comparing two different levels of APIs. The
opencmis-provider-api handles simple immutable data objects while chemistry-api
follows an object-oriented approach. As far as I
On Dec 11, 2009, at 7:10 PM, Florian Müller wrote:
Chemistry uses Abdera to communicate with the server while OpenCMIS
is based on JAX-B and some CMIS specific XML coding.
I've been personally asking myself recently wether it would be
feasible to drop Abdera in favor of JAXB in
Well, here is a citation from
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html (section The Foundation
Incubator):
It must be noted that the incubator (just like the board) does not perform
filtering on the basis of technical issues. This is because the foundation
respects and suggests
I've said my peace on this issue. If the committer(s) need mentors to help
them learn the ropes, try working with the new d...@community.apache.org list
to set up a formal arrangement.
OTOH I won't stand in the way if commons insists on incubating this effort.
- Original Message
+1
Congratulations!
Craig
On Dec 7, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu wrote:
Hi;
After over one years in the incubator with providing
three releases
OpenWebBeans community with the support of our mentors feel
that we are
ready to propose to the Incubator PMC
Florian Müller wrote:
Well, here is a citation from http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html (section
The Foundation Incubator):
It must be noted that the incubator (just like the board) does not perform
filtering on the basis of technical issues. This is because the foundation
Dear all,
this incubator pmc vote has passed with 3x +1 from:
antelder, gmcdonald and carnold
Thanks for voting and your help!
I will upload the release somewhen early next week.
Best regards,
Christian
-- Forwarded message --
From: Curt Arnold carn...@apache.org
Date: Sat,
Great. Here's the tally:
+1s:
Kevan Miller
Joe Schaefer
ant elder
Upayavira
-1s: none
So, this release is good to go. I'll post it to the download page,
update website, etc, this weekend.
Thanks, everyone
-Todd
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 6:23 AM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On 12/11/09 1:14 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
I would like to present an incubator proposal for a new Validation
podling, which would be a JSR-303 Bean Validation follow-on to the
existing Apache Commons Validation 1.x project, but based on a new
incoming codebase with a software grant from Agimatec
Heya OpenCMIS folks,
Since it looks like you aren't currently supported by a champion or
mentor [1], I thought I'd fill in a small part and inject some warm
fuzzies...
*Thanks* for open sourcing your project and *thanks* for considering
doing it at apache. Its always a lot of effort to go
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Tim Ellison t.p.elli...@gmail.com wrote:
Hudson build machine accounts are created upon request for members of
(P)PMCs.
Does the Cassandra project have a PPMC? I don't see one in the
asf-authorization file, and have a request from Eric for an account [1].
34 matches
Mail list logo
