FYI..
I am in stress mode currently.. Wednesday I will arrive in Austin though and will catch up with all
Apache related stuff.
Mvgr,
Martin
Nathan Bubna wrote:
Ok, Geir's +1/-1 has been resolved to just a +1. So the vote now stand as:
+1 votes:
Nathan Bubna
Martin van den Bemt
James
Ok, Geir's +1/-1 has been resolved to just a +1. So the vote now stand as:
+1 votes:
Nathan Bubna
Martin van den Bemt
James Mitchell
Henri Yandell
Jorg Schaible
Henning P. Schmiedehausen
Will Glass-Husain
Torsten Curdt
Rony G. Flatscher
Jesse Kuhnert
Dion Gillard
Daniel Rall
Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/24/06, Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
But putting anything that uses Velocity into a TLP is like using
things
that use log4j into the same TLP (which
+1
Nathan Bubna wrote:
Sure.
Geir, should i put you down as +1 or +0 on the TLP vote?
On 9/25/06, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great. I've a message in draft on the charter, but will send that
after this one.
So there's no confusion, Nathan - maybe you should resend the
Yeah, but he could be a velocity committer w/o click being in the TLP.
Click sounds like a good candidate for a project on it's own.
geir
Will Glass-Husain wrote:
By the way, Click is an interesting case study for eventual TLP inclusion.
Click is an innovative approach to web frameworks
To me, the vote to go TLP is done. I appreciate the respect and
deference though.
As for the -1, that's about the charter we'd propose to the board, and
we still have a month, so I'm sure we'll come to consensus easily.
geir
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/23/06, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Great. I've a message in draft on the charter, but will send that
after this one.
So there's no confusion, Nathan - maybe you should resend the vote
count to general noting the TLP vote is really closed and all -1's are
resolved?
Cheers,
WILL
On 9/25/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure.
Geir, should i put you down as +1 or +0 on the TLP vote?
On 9/25/06, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great. I've a message in draft on the charter, but will send that
after this one.
So there's no confusion, Nathan - maybe you should resend the vote
count to general noting
By the way, Click is an interesting case study for eventual TLP inclusion.
Click is an innovative approach to web frameworks with an active
community.The lead developer (Malcolm Edgar) has been actively
participating on the velocity lists and supplying patches.
There's a good
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I'm +1 and -1.
I'm +1 as I do think that Velocity as a TLP is not unreasonable. Not
necessary, but not unreasonable.
I'm -1 because I'm worried that
On 9/23/06, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wow. Skip email for a day and there's a blizzard. I take Geir's
comments pretty seriously though.
To me, the most important part of this is the opportunity to grow the
developer community. That's easy to say, of course. Technically, any
On 9/24/06, Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
But putting anything that uses Velocity into a TLP is like using things
that use log4j into the same TLP (which would re-create Jakarta... :)
Yep, good thing that's not the
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/24/06, Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
But putting anything that uses Velocity into a TLP is like using
things
that use log4j into the same TLP (which would re-create
Jakarta... :)
Yep,
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I'm +1 and -1.
I'm +1 as I do think that Velocity as a TLP is not unreasonable. Not
necessary, but not unreasonable.
I'm -1
On 9/24/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I'm +1 and -1.
I'm +1 as I do think that Velocity as a TLP is not
Right - moving to TLP doesn't make a difference there, other than the
plan to bring in velocity related things into the project, which grows
the commiter base.
geir
Nathan Bubna wrote:
No, that is not basically the reason.
On 9/22/06, Daniel Dekany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Saturday,
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 9/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This vote closed sooner than expected. I was traveling and there was no
stated deadline.
Aw, c'mon. It's been in discussion on velocity-dev for over a month,
and i gave the vote a full week!
Not complaining,
Adding velocity-dev
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
Hi,
I'm completely with Nathan here. A Velocity TLP will not be another
Jakarta (though I do fail to see why everyone seems to believe that
Jakata is always considered a bad example).
Right - the only thing that was bad about Jakarta is
Wow. Skip email for a day and there's a blizzard. I take Geir's
comments pretty seriously though.
To me, the most important part of this is the opportunity to grow the
developer community. That's easy to say, of course. Technically, any
committer in Jakarta now has svn commit rights to
Looks like the Velocity community is ready to head out on its own...
+1 votes:
Nathan Bubna
Martin van den Bemt
James Mitchell
Henri Yandell
Jorg Schaible
Henning P. Schmiedehausen
Will Glass-Husain
Torsten Curdt
Rony G. Flatscher
Jesse Kuhnert
Dion Gillard
Daniel Rall
Matthijs
This vote closed sooner than expected. I was traveling and there was no
stated deadline.
I'm +1 and -1.
I'm +1 as I do think that Velocity as a TLP is not unreasonable. Not
necessary, but not unreasonable.
I'm -1 because I'm worried that this is a new kind of umbrella that's
planned. Making
Saturday, September 23, 2006, 1:02:35 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
This vote closed sooner than expected. I was traveling and there was no
stated deadline.
[snip]
So, Velocity will be TLP. Now, somebody correct me if I get it wrong,
but is the reason basically that its developer community was
No, that is not basically the reason.
On 9/22/06, Daniel Dekany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Saturday, September 23, 2006, 1:02:35 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
This vote closed sooner than expected. I was traveling and there was no
stated deadline.
[snip]
So, Velocity will be TLP. Now,
oops, only sent this reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] repeating it here...
On 9/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This vote closed sooner than expected. I was traveling and there was no
stated deadline.
Aw, c'mon. It's been in discussion on velocity-dev for over a month,
and i
24 matches
Mail list logo
