Paul Fremantle is listed as one of our mentors on the JSecurity Proposal. He just didn't vote.
I didn't mention the multiple build systems because I was unsure if that issue came to consensus or not. I stated that I didn't mind if both were in place, but then someone raised the issue as to what would be the 'formal' one that would be used for releases, and how we would maintain both, and I don't think that was ever answered or resolved among the team members. I just wasn't clear enough as to what to became of that discussion :/ On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[email protected]> wrote: > "3 of the 5 project mentors ..." should read "Three of four project mentors > ..." > > You neglected to mention that we would have both ant and maven build systems > in place. > > > Regards, > Alan > > On Jan 11, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote: > >> I just updated the report - please lemme know if that is OK. >> >> Thanks again, >> >> Les >> >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Emmanuel, >>> >>> Thanks very much for the feedback - I appreciate it a lot. I'll >>> adjust accordingly and re-notify so we can review again. >>> >>>> 1) About the name, I would suggest we just keep the matter open, as >>>> more >>>> IPMC members are stepping in. Right now, the vote is closed and the >>>> result >>>> is not positive, but (1) I don't think it was a good idea to vote such >>>> an >>>> item [1] and (2) I'm not sure I won't cast my vote in another direction >>>> if >>>> Juniper is not considered as a risk or if Juniper legals just let us >>>> using >>>> JSecurity. >>> >>> Gotcha. I'll revise that section to say it is still open at the moment. >>> >>>> 2) You have to mention that Alex Karasulu has stepped down as a mentor. >>> >>> Ah yes, thanks. I'll add that as well. >>> >>>> Otherwise, it's a pretty good report. We have one more day for other >>>> comments. >>>> >>>> [1] The reason I think it was not a good idea to vote is that if we are >>>> not >>>> trying to solve an issue, but to determinate if there is an IP issue. No >>>> matter if you get all the -1 needed to keep JSecurity name, you may >>>> still be >>>> forced to change the name if The ASF get sued and lose. >>> >>> Sounds good. It is very helpful to learn when would be a good time to >>> vote vs when to let discussion continue. This was a great learning >>> experience for me, and is one of the great things the Incubator >>> affords us. Thanks :) >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Les >>> >> > >
