Well, either someone granted it to me, or I already had it ... my initial HiveMind stuff is up.
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 3:38 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] sandbox karma for "Howard M. Lewis > Ship"[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I agree with Tim, Howard should just be granted karma I believe... > +1 otherwise > Stephen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tim O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:59 PM > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] sandbox karma for "Howard M. Lewis > Ship"[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > +1, but I'm not really sure if this is a binding vote. Assume, I'm > > voting as Commons committer *only*. > > > > I'm a little confused, my understanding of the current > system is: Any > > Jakarta Committer can simply ask for karma to the sandbox. Someone > > like Craig usually just makes the appropriate changes to the avail > > file (or so I assume), and the deal is done. > > > > So, Tapestry just navigated the Incubator, and is now a part of > > Jakarta. Howard is a Jakarta committer, and all he has to > do is ask. > > That's straightforward, no PMC vote, no Commons Committer > vote needed. > > I believe that someone just needs to give him karma - that > would be in > > line with past practices. > > > > The confusing part comes in when someone who is not a Jakarta > > Committer wants access to the commons-sandbox. I think people just > > wanted non-Jakarta committers to have the approval of the > Jakarta PMC > > before being granted karma. I'm not batting for that > "side" per se, > > but the PMC maintains an oversight role for new committers (i.e. > > requests for new accounts come from the PMC) - the "opposition" in > > this case just wants the PMC to have some oversight when a > non-Jakarta > > committer requests access. Does that make any sense? > > > > In Howard's case, he's a Tapestry committer - I don't see > the need for > > a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > (which includes a lot of Ant, DB, James, Maven committers > > > > > > On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 18:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > +1 > > > -- > > > dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting > > > Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog > > > Work: http://www.multitask.com.au > > > > > > > > > robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2003 > > > 07:27:29 > > > AM: > > > > > > > Howard M. Lewis Ship (well known as a leading light of the > > > > recently incubated tapestry project) would like access to the > > > > commons-sandbox > in > > > > order to work on a new component as outlined below in the > > > > following > > > email: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-commons-dev&m=10541655 5202303&w=2 > > > > > > i'd like to propose that we grant him karma. > > > > > > (i know that the debate about processes is still on going but i thought > > > that might as well have an example to talk about ;) > > > > > > - robert > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > --- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
