Hi Pontus,
It looks good. I'm upgrading to Camel 2.15.4 and so fixing components.
If we have to "maintain" 2.15.0 I will create a specific branch.
WDYT ?
Regards
JB
On 11/13/2015 10:47 PM, Pontus Ullgren wrote:
So now the repository should be back "online".
I did a reimport of the google code repository and then rebased the
changes in master, that was previously only in the github repo, on top
of that.
Hopefully I have not missed any commits.
I had to disable the wmq (and the cis was disabled since before)
components since they depend on artifacts that are not in any public
repos. This was made intentionally.
Jean-Baptist, Roman Martin, Stephen and Greg: Could you all please take
a extra close look at make sure I have not missed any of your commits.
If I have please forgive me and tell me so I can try to fix it. Or just
recommit them and push :-)
Thanks
Pontus Ullgren
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 at 17:06 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com
<mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
OK so the new imported repo was trashed I guess due to some forced
push.
I will make a new try to fix this later.
Could you please wait with pushing commits for the time beeing.
// Pontus
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 at 16:51 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com
<mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello.
The camel-extra repo from google code has been reimported to a
new repo on github.
The previous import has been renamed to camel-extra-firstimport
but I could not find any easy way to make it read only.
What is left is to reapply the patches I will get onto that
during the weekend.
Best regards
Pontus Ullgren
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 11:16 David Karlsen
<davidkarl...@gmail.com <mailto:davidkarl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
That sounds good so we don't loose anything. Can I
additionally
suggest that the old repo get's closed/set readonly or
something after
the move so we don't end up here again?
Keeping the mailinglist seems reasonable as extra will be
very low
traffic - and then easier to notice when using same
communication
channels etc
2015-11-11 9:43 GMT+01:00 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com
<mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>>:
> Great,
>
> I would be happy to do this new migration (already have
the privileges
> needed on the github organisation).
> However I will wait an additional 72h just to see if
there are any
> objections :-)
>
> // Pontus
>
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 09:40 Claus Ibsen
<claus.ib...@gmail.com <mailto:claus.ib...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yeah sure I think re-creating the code on github with
latest from
>> google code, and then add those PR's commits that are
extra on github
>> today could be the way forward.
>>
>> As we take the latest code from camel-extra then we are
sure we have
>> all the bits that people are using today from the
official releases.
>>
>> About the extra mailing lists. I would actually prefer
to not
>> duplicate all the setup for extra, but just use this
mailing list, and
>> then the github issue tracker for the extra tickets. By
using this
>> mailing list then its much easier to share knowledge of
the extra
>> project. I dont think people bother to signup on endless
number of
>> mailing lists.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Pontus Ullgren
<ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Any thoughts or comments on this ?
>> >
>> > As I wrote above the two code bases has diverged but
since the latest
>> > official release has been made from the google code
repo I think it
>> would
>> > be best to treat this as the official repository and
recreate the gihub
>> > repo with a new import to from google code.
>> >
>> > Should we have a vote on this ? Or should this issue
be handled on the
>> > camel-extra mailing list instead ?
>> >
>> > Best regards
>> > Pontus Ullgren
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 at 00:13 Pontus Ullgren
<ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> A short update.
>> >> Looked through the commits in the google code repo
and github and as a
>> >> feared the two code bases has diverged with commits
being done to both
>> >> places.
>> >>
>> >> However I think I managed to juggle the commits for
the master branch so
>> >> that the result is something that is acceptable. I
have yet to run tests
>> >> and make sure things work as expected.
>> >>
>> >> I have not yet started looking into merging in the
changes for the
>> 2.13.x,
>> >> 2.14.x and 2.15.x.
>> >>
>> >> However looking at the commit in github it seems to
mainly be the
>> >> contribution of Camel IBM CICS and Camel WMQ
component. Both which I
>> find a
>> >> bit strange that they were even added to camel-extra
since they have
>> >> dependencies to libraries that are not publicly
accessible, and must be
>> >> locally installed. So these will never be able to
build and test in the
>> CI
>> >> environment. Also I'm not sure about the possible
licensing issues for
>> >> these components. And will we be able to release them
if the person in
>> >> charge of the release does not have access to the
closed source
>> libraries ?
>> >>
>> >> So a possible, much simpler, way forward would be to
rename the current
>> >> github camel-extra repo, create a new and simply
re-import from the
>> current
>> >> google code repo.
>> >>
>> >> We could then sit down and move over the commits that
makes sense from
>> the
>> >> once that was done on github.
>> >>
>> >> Comments ?
>> >>
>> >> // Pontus
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 at 15:51 Pontus Ullgren
<ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Yes, camel-extra copied to github quite some time
ago. However after
>> that
>> >>> there was a period of uncertainty during which more
commits and even
>> >>> releases where made from the Google code repo up
until the point where
>> >>> google shutdown there service.
>> >>>
>> >>> As time has gone by it seems that there is a risk
that the code bases
>> has
>> >>> diverge.
>> >>> Is there anybody already looking into this? If not I
would be happy to
>> >>> try to make sure that the latest code from Google
code is synced to the
>> >>> github.com <http://github.com> repositories.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regarding SF from the latest ComDev discussions it
turns out that, at
>> >>> least to my interpretation, it is up to each PMC to
decide where and
>> what
>> >>> they want to do with their extras project. Nothing
will be
>> automatically
>> >>> moved by apache infra.
>> >>>
>> >>> Best regards
>> >>>
>> >>> Pontus
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2015, 14:42 David Karlsen
<davidkarl...@gmail.com <mailto:davidkarl...@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> https://github.com/camel-extra/camel-extra
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 2015-10-31 14:01 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
>> >>>> krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com
<mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com>>:
>> >>>> > Hi JB
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > I have seen the discussion that Camel Extras is
going to move to
>> >>>> Github. I thought it's done already. Have you
already final descision
>> about
>> >>>> Camel Extras? I have seen discussion on ComDev
about moving to SF but
>> the
>> >>>> projects will be not forced to move together to SF.
As i have seen
>> Camel
>> >>>> prefers Github. I'm looking for
>> >>>> > instructions how to migrate the svn repo to git
and I thought Camel
>> >>>> has already finished this process.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Kindly regards
>> >>>> > Krzysztof
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On 31.10.2015 13:43, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> >>>> >> Hi Krysztof,
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> camel-extras are not on github right. I've done
some cleanups and
>> >>>> upgrades.
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> Regards
>> >>>> >> JB
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> On 10/29/2015 08:15 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:
>> >>>> >>> Hi
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> Have you already performed the migration to
Github? Have you done
>> it
>> >>>> alone? I assume Infra doesn't support this process?
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> Regards
>> >>>> >>> Krzysztof
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> On 17.09.2015 21:00, Pontus Ullgren wrote:
>> >>>> >>>> I believe changing the package name would be a
real problem for
>> >>>> users of
>> >>>> >>>> the library.
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>> Not sure why we can not continue to use that
package name since
>> >>>> according
>> >>>> >>>> to the answers Raul got on the com-dev
mailinglist [1] it is up
>> to
>> >>>> each
>> >>>> >>>> projects PMC to decide how there extras
project should be
>> handled.
>> >>>> >>>> So if the Camel PMC decided that the Camel
Extras source code
>> >>>> should be
>> >>>> >>>> hosted on github I do not see any problem to
keep the package
>> name
>> >>>> as is.
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>> [1]
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3ccadmm+kcy9c6rgodshexgsrduu7jur06jwcs9yp-hc8mapm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 at 13:57 Christian Müller <
>> >>>> christian.muel...@gmail.com
<mailto:christian.muel...@gmail.com>>
>> >>>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>> I'm also not happy with the support/guidance
from dev@community
>> >>>> regarding
>> >>>> >>>>> this topic and +1 to move to Github now. I'm
not convinced from
>> SF.
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>> Before we are releasing our first release
there, please check
>> with
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>> Apache trademarks first, whether you can
still use the name
>> "Camel
>> >>>> Extra"
>> >>>> >>>>> or not. The same for the package name (it has
apache and camel
>> in
>> >>>> it),
>> >>>> >>>>> because this project doesn't belong to Apache
Extra anymore in
>> the
>> >>>> future,
>> >>>> >>>>> in my opinion.
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>> Best,
>> >>>> >>>>> Christian
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>> Am 17.09.2015 10:43 schrieb "Raul Kripalani"
<r...@evosent.com <mailto:r...@evosent.com>
>> >:
>> >>>> >>>>>> Agree. From my point of view, if the Camel
extras community
>> feels
>> >>>> >>>>>> comfortable with Github, then go for it. It
seems like the
>> joint
>> >>>> Apache
>> >>>> >>>>>> Extras effort has somewhat disintegrated
anyway.
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>> We did our part: having a discussion there
and sharing our
>> >>>> concerns at
>> >>>> >>>>>> dev@community. So I'm happy with how we
dealt with this issue.
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>> Let us know when it's done so we can update
the links on the
>> >>>> Apache Camel
>> >>>> >>>>>> website.
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>> Raúl.
>> >>>> >>>>>> On 17 Sep 2015 07:50, "Pontus Ullgren"
<ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> Hello again,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> So I tried to reach out to com-dev
beginning this month[1] and
>> >>>> it seems
>> >>>> >>>>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>> be a dead end.
>> >>>> >>>>>>> Some answers[2] even suggest that it is up
to the PMCs.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> So in line of the two previous votes[3] [4]
I think we should
>> go
>> >>>> ahead
>> >>>> >>>>> and
>> >>>> >>>>>>> continue the move to github.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> Best regards
>> >>>> >>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> [1]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3CCABe1WL-mcFvPUmUwjLXmgLUOSSQUrhT5z7Adj2WPVS8NwSQnuA%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>> [2]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3ccadmm+kcy9c6rgodshexgsrduu7jur06jwcs9yp-hc8mapm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>> [3]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201504.mbox/%3C1391078472.16070484.1428686018450.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>> [4]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201504.mbox/%3C301126299.246793.1429101018000.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 19:54 Pontus Ullgren
<ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> While I personally think that is github is
superior to what
>> SF
>> >>>> offers
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> (and that bitbucket is superior to github)
for camel-extra I
>> >>>> don't
>> >>>> >>>>> think
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> the choice of hosting company is that big
a deal.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> Camel-Extra currently uses
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Mailing list provided by nabble (
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> http://camel-extra.1091541.n5.nabble.com/)
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Jenkins provided by cloudbees (
>> >>>> >>>>> https://camel-extra.ci.cloudbees.com/
>> >>>> >>>>> )
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> * SonarQube provided by SonarQube (
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
http://nemo.sonarqube.org/dashboard/index/564228)
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Jira for issues provided by Atlassian (
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
https://camel-extra.atlassian.net/browse/CAMEX)
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> * End user component documentations are
hosted on the main
>> camel
>> >>>> >>>>> project
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> wiki
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> So even back when we where on google code
the only thing that
>> >>>> it was
>> >>>> >>>>> used
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> for was to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> provide a wiki for some project specific
documentation such
>> as
>> >>>> >>>>> release
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> notes and most important
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> the GIT repo.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> So as long as the service provider
provides git, a simple
>> way of
>> >>>> >>>>> hosting
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> some documentation and
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> has a good reputation of keeping a good
uptime on the service
>> >>>> in my
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> opinion it is not that big a deal
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> where or what is hosting it. The important
thing is that we
>> get
>> >>>> this
>> >>>> >>>>> up
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> read-write ASAP.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> Just my $0.02
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 17:59 Raul Kripalani
<r...@evosent.com <mailto:r...@evosent.com>
>> >
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Rob,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> I think camel-extras belongs to the
Apache Extras [1]
>> >>>> umbrella...
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> That said, I'm not quite sure what's the
point of grouping
>> all
>> >>>> >>>>> "extras"
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> from all projects under a common ASF
umbrella – I'm assuming
>> >>>> it's
>> >>>> >>>>> for
>> >>>> >>>>>>> ASF
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> organisational reasons. It definitely
doesn't serve a
>> technical
>> >>>> >>>>> reason
>> >>>> >>>>>>> nor
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> an administrative one: (a) each Extras
project is more
>> closely
>> >>>> >>>>> related
>> >>>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the parent than to all other Extras
project in ASF and (b)
>> the
>> >>>> roles
>> >>>> >>>>> in
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> camel-extras "organisation" do show some
correlation with
>> the
>> >>>> roles
>> >>>> >>>>> at
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache Camel, but they are not
necessarily tied together,
>> i.e.
>> >>>> >>>>> there's
>> >>>> >>>>>>> no
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> requirement that a committer in
camel-extras has to be a
>> >>>> committer
>> >>>> >>>>> in
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache Camel, right?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> [1]
https://community.apache.org/apache-extras/faq.html
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Raúl.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Rob
Davies <
>> >>>> rajdav...@gmail.com <mailto:rajdav...@gmail.com>>
>> >>>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> The way I read it is comdev are doing a
mass migration to
>> SF
>> >>>> - its
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> understandable they wouldn’t want
multiple targets - so to
>> >>>> pick
>> >>>> >>>>> one
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> destination for the code move makes
sense. However its not
>> >>>> clear
>> >>>> >>>>> that
>> >>>> >>>>>>> we
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> have to keep camel-extra at SF - or why
we couldn’t just
>> move
>> >>>> it
>> >>>> >>>>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> GitHub
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ourselves ?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4 Sep 2015, at 15:54, Pontus Ullgren
<
>> ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:ullg...@gmail.com>>
>> >>>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Victor and David: You are welcome to
join the com-dev
>> mailing
>> >>>> >>>>> list
>> >>>> >>>>>>> and
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> enlighten them.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Here is a link the latest answer on
that question :-)
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201507.mbox/%3CBY2PR03MB490B6943E12F5D925203A2E99900%40BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 16:01 David
Karlsen <
>> >>>> >>>>> davidkarl...@gmail.com
<mailto:davidkarl...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why not github?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4. sep. 2015 3:54 p.m. skrev "Victor
NOËL" <
>> >>>> >>>>>>> victor.n...@linagora.com
<mailto:victor.n...@linagora.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> :
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are they even aware of the problem
with sourceforge?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe someone that is known there
(such as a member of
>> an
>> >>>> >>>>> Apache
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Project
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ;) could tell them before they take
the wrong decision?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's even worse than what I thought
because after the
>> Gimp
>> >>>> >>>>> people
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> told
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> SF
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to stop doing their shady things,
they actually insisted
>> >>>> >>>>> during
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> 2015:
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00097.html
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00098.html
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Victor
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 04/09/2015 15:36, Raul Kripalani a
écrit :
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quite frankly, SF would be my last
resort. But the
>> Apache
>> >>>> >>>>> Extras
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories are governed by the ASF
and the consensus
>> >>>> seems
>> >>>> >>>>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> point
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SF
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather than Github (which would have
been my personal
>> >>>> >>>>> preference)
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bitbucket.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Raúl Kripalani*
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer
| Enterprise
>> >>>> Architect,
>> >>>> >>>>> Open
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Source
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration specialist
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://about.me/raulkripalani |
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter:
@raulvk
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:22 PM,
Victor NOËL <
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> victor.n...@linagora.com
<mailto:victor.n...@linagora.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I arrive a bit late, but are we sure
sourceforge is a
>> good
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> solution?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After all the fuss about their
terrible behaviour by
>> >>>> >>>>> implanting
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> adware
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other spyware in installers
available to download
>> there.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It became known with the big
complain of the Gimp
>> project
>> >>>> >>>>> (that
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wasn't
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even fixed by SourceForge…).
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_ads_and_installer/
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for details.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Victor
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 04/09/2015 13:29, Pontus Ullgren
a écrit :
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we not already have volunteers
in the current set
>> of
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> contributors
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the project ?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I for one is willing in continue
maintaining the
>> project
>> >>>> >>>>> once
>> >>>> >>>>>>> it
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> has
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moved (where ever it is moved).
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the question right now is
the progress of
>> the SF
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> migration.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 09:18 Henryk
Konsek <
>> >>>> >>>>> hekon...@gmail.com <mailto:hekon...@gmail.com
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As far as I know the Apache
Extras projects are
>> being
>> >>>> >>>>> moved to
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> the...
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SourceForge. So we need to find a
volunteer willing
>> to
>> >>>> >>>>>>> maintain
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after SourceForge migration.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers!
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> czw., 3.09.2015 o 20:38
użytkownik Pontus Ullgren <
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:
ullg...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> napisał:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have not seen any other updates
on the comdev
>> mailing
>> >>>> list
>> >>>> >>>>> no.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps we should reach out to
Daniel Gruno (that
>> >>>> seems
>> >>>> >>>>> to be
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the move) to get a status update
for camel-extra.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 at 23:57 Raul
Kripalani <
>> >>>> >>>>> r...@evosent.com <mailto:r...@evosent.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey guys,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have an update on the ASF
front about the
>> >>>> Apache
>> >>>> >>>>>>> Extras
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migration?
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Users are asking for new
releases of camel-extras
>> >>>> >>>>>>> components...
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I quickly went through the
ComDev thread but
>> found no
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> conclusion.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe I
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overlooked an email in that
thread. Things tend to
>> get
>> >>>> >>>>> very
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> chatty
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there and there's no clearly
marked conclusion
>> email.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Raúl Kripalani*
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Camel PMC Member &
Committer | Enterprise
>> >>>> >>>>> Architect,
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Open
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration specialist
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://about.me/raulkripalani |
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.raulkr.net |
twitter: @raulvk
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:56
AM, Pontus Ullgren <
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ullg...@gmail.com <mailto:
ullg...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From this thread[1] it seems
that Daniel Gruno
>> is
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>> one
>> >>>> >>>>>>> in
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> charge
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the move.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However I fail to find any
indication on the
>> >>>> progress
>> >>>> >>>>> or
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> roadmap.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Using Github as a backup plan
does NOT[2] seem to
>> >>>> be a
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> option in
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion of the community-dev
decision.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway perhaps we should move
this discussion to
>> the
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> camel-dev
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailinglist.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/%3C559EC097.7000707%40apache.org%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>>
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/%3cby2pr03mb490b6943e12f5d925203a2e99...@by2pr03mb490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 at 07:17
Christoph
>> Emmersberger <
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cemme...@gmail.com
<mailto:cemme...@gmail.com>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any date when this
move is expected? We
>> >>>> have
>> >>>> >>>>> still
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backup
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >
