Hi guys,

anyone of you able to help ?


-Matthias

On 9/1/07, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Someone who has commit rights to the incubator IP clearance page has
> to commit it there - so Michael couldn't have done so, I suppose. Has
> there be an Apache member taking this over?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 8/31/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yeah, supposedly.  The work for the IP Clearance form was submitted by
> > the JSR-301 Project Lead on the 16th.  At least that's what I was told
> > which is why he told me to go-ahead and submit it.  But I haven't seen
> > it processed by Apache yet.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > Hi Matthias, Scott,
> > >
> > > has the IP Clearance form already been filled out and committed?
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 8/17/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> but all this, can be fixed, when it's already committed.
> > >>
> > >> We needed NOTICE and LICENSE files inside both JARs as well.
> > >>
> > >> -M
> > >>
> > >> On 8/17/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> yes pom as well.
> > >>>
> > >>> and also files in:
> > >>> -META-INF/services/
> > >>> -META-INF/
> > >>>
> > >>> @myfaces: a bug ....
> > >>>
> > >>> On 8/17/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hey, it looks like I did the impl, just not the API.  I'm fixing that 
> > >>>> now.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That said, does the liscence need to be in the POM files?  I didn't
> > >>>> notice a liscence in the MyFaces 1.2 POM files...  I have no problems
> > >>>> putting it in, certainly, but we may want to make the 1.2 branch of
> > >>>> MyFaces compliant with this as well.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Scott
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hey Scott,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> did a quick look.
> > >>>>> POMs and API .java class have to contain the Apache 2.0 license as 
> > >>>>> well.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Greetings,
> > >>>>> Matthias
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> PS: build runs .... :-)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 8/17/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> there was no real tomahawk bridge.
> > >>>>>> that stuff is part of myfaces 1.1 (the core impl)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> the difference here is that 301 specifies a way, how a JSF 1.2
> > >>>>>> application should work inside a portal.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> for jsf 1.1 there was "just" a note like "JSF 1.1 should run in a
> > >>>>>> portlet..." (very simplified statement)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> So, no not a replacement, "just" an IMPL of the java SPEC ;-)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 8/17/07, Alexander Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Does this bridge replace Tomahawk bridge?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Aug 17, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Sounds good to me.  Should we open up a discussion though on
> > >>>>>>>> "where" this should be committed so that we can hit the ground
> > >>>>>>>> running once the paperwork is listed?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Scott
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On 8/17/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Hey everyone.  After tearing though the bureaucracy much slower
> > >>>>>>>>>> then I
> > >>>>>>>>>> would have liked, I uploaded the code to  MYFACES-1664 for the
> > >>>>>>>>>> JSR-301
> > >>>>>>>>>> Portlet Bridge.  This code should comply with the latest public
> > >>>>>>>>>> draft of
> > >>>>>>>>>> the JSR-301 specification and, once we figure out where to put
> > >>>>>>>>>> this and
> > >>>>>>>>>> get it made available in svn, I'd like to see people get their
> > >>>>>>>>>> hands on
> > >>>>>>>>>> it and try it out.  It is going to change some things (for the
> > >>>>>>>>>> better I
> > >>>>>>>>>> hope), but if there are any unresolvable issues with it, my hope
> > >>>>>>>>>> is that
> > >>>>>>>>>> we can get those concerns voiced so that we can incorporate them
> > >>>>>>>>>> into
> > >>>>>>>>>> the final draft.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> That said, what are our next steps?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> we have to wait with the commit, until that the paperworks 
> > >>>>>>>>> (Schedule
> > >>>>>>>>> B) is listed here:
> > >>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> -M
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Scott
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> further stuff:
> > >>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > >>>>>> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Matthias Wessendorf
> > >>>
> > >>> further stuff:
> > >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > >>> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> --
> > >> Matthias Wessendorf
> > >>
> > >> further stuff:
> > >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > >> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org

Reply via email to