On Feb 1, 2007, at 8:53 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jan 31, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
Filip,
OK. Now I'm confused.
Do you want Geronimo to accept a code donation? Or do you want to
start a new project in incubator? I thought it was the former (and
I'm pretty sure you do, t
Here's the process :
1) Contributor offers code
2) Project decides to accept or reject code. Formally, this is the
PMC, but everyone should chime in.
3) Contributor provides CCLA, cleans up code to remove copyright
statements, and puts the standard apache file header in place.
4) Projec
+1
On Dec 21, 2006, at 1:54 AM, David Blevins wrote:
I've done the work to fix some of our spec jars so they are
compliant and would like us to start releasing them and removing
snapshot references from our builds.
The first one I fixed is javax.annotation 1.0:
Release Branch: https://sv
remote location where
we would actually have physical access to those files.
But this wont address the issue of releasing a new version with a full
doc included in the dist.
Cheers!
Hernan
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Hernan Cunico wrote:
I certainly don't mind being pointed as a reference ;-)
(he's right...)
Jeff Genender wrote:
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Thanks...I now officially dub thee Jeff Magnusson Jr. :)
I don't mean to be a stickler...but when I used that term (JEE5) on the
spec commitee, I really got lashed, so I try to be politically correct ;-)
On Oct 20, 2006, at 3:45 PM
Bite me
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Thanks...I now officially dub thee Jeff Magnusson Jr. :)
On Oct 20, 2006, at 3:45 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
We are working on
our next version of the server which is based on JEE 1.5. Some of our
Use "Java EE5" please. JEE 1.5 is a no-no.
They aren't tested.
Can we put a separate section (or a separate page) for the non-certified
downloads?
geir
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Often users who are not committers offer help with documentations and
>> we don't want to turn them down.
>>
>> Did you ever have to deal with it, and if so, how do you solve the
>> legal issues with Confluence c
David Jencks wrote:
> To get jpa support in we need a jta1.1 transaction manager. There are
> two possibilities I can think of:
>
> -- Sun might let us certify under j2ee 1.4 while including the jta1.1
> spec jar. AFAIK only Geir can find out if this is possible. If we can
> do this, it's by
;> We may need another step to put apache headers on the generated code.
>> Some of the generated stuff is binary files, which AFAIK cannot be
>> modified to include a header. I'll probably need help with this part.
>>
>> Is everyone OK with putting this into spec
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
>> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Well, the problem is that we distribute the source code for Geronimo out
>>> of SVN and these would end up being included. I think that falls into
>
; once, publish the jars, delete the schemas and be done with it.
>
> -David
>
> On Aug 18, 2006, at 9:45 AM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>
>>> If they are only used during the build process, then don&#
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Heads up...we're using IRC for real-time collaboration on this and will
> post updates to the dev list. IRC is at irc.freenode.net channel
> #geronimo.
I won't be able to be there.
geir
>
> Right now I'm removing ./modules/j2ee-schema/src/resources/* and
> building to
? I would
> expect we're ok going forward and we leave what's out there. If not I
> think Geronimo, Tomcat and others all have an issue. Not sure about the
> other projects though.
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> If they are only used during the build process, t
If they are only used during the build process, then don't re-distribute
and therefore this issue then seems out of the critical path for 1.1.1
and can be solved for 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
gier
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> They are used by XMLBeans during the build process. I guess we could do
> a one-tim
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2307?page=comments#action_12428806
]
Geir Magnusson Jr commented on GERONIMO-2307:
-
Clearly the documents as is are not appropriate for redistribution, as they say
"no redistrib
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2307?page=comments#action_12428791
]
Geir Magnusson Jr commented on GERONIMO-2307:
-
following a voice discussion, I've asked formally for Sun to
a) confirm no problem with typin
welcome
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> The Apache Geronimo PMC would like to let everyone know that Alan
> Cabrera has accepted the invitation to join the Geronimo PMC. We are
> excited to have Alan assisting with project oversight in addition to his
> technical contributions to Geronimo.
>
> Alan has b
I agree with this - we'll fix the default in the next rev. There have
been some good ideas (including mine, I think) and we'll see how they
work in code.
geir
David Blevins wrote:
> Everyone, please read and ACK.
>
> On Jun 14, 2006, at 4:31 PM, John Sisson wrote:
>
>> Hiram, I care if a priv
+1
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> The way the specs are currently organized is way too cumbersome and
> confusing. I propose that we get rid of the root POM for specs and that
> each spec gets its own branches, tags, and trunk, so that each may be
> released independently on its own.
>
> I think that
done
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Yes, thanks...JIRA
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> Do you mean JIRA?
>>
>> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Geir,
>>>
>>> Can you grant me SVN Karma to add contributors? Dain is on vacation.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Do you mean JIRA?
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Geir,
>
> Can you grant me SVN Karma to add contributors? Dain is on vacation.
>
> Thanks
>
> Matt
>
>
how about deleteing it and put a note somewhere about the rev number so
someone can go back and get it if they wish, w/o it being received by
anyone doing a /branch checkout?
geir
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 5/22/06, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think this would be kind of mislea
+1
Seems to need some kind of "theme music" while you are doing it...
geir
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I would like to make the following changes to the dev tree for
Geronimo. Assuming there is concurrence and no objections I would like to:
move geronimo/trunk to geronimo/branches/oldtrunk
copy
Oh. I thought it was "to cover in goop", as "that API is really
invasive - it will goopen your codebase..."
geir
David Blevins wrote:
Heh, maybe "go" is James' new "Active"
I can see it now... GoMQ, GoIO, GoCluster
-David
On May 17, 2006, a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Developers,
In response to Hernan's call for documentation contributions, I've started
work on a Getting Started XDoc based on the Geronimo Quick Start section of
Aaron Mulder's online book. However, it occurs to me that because the
original material is copyright
What is "goopen.org"?
James Strachan wrote:
Now we've got the confluence -> static html in subversion thing all
squared away I've moved the existing XBean site over to Geronimo
http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/
which is all auto-generated and checked into svn & updated on apache
from the wiki
ooh - sorry - I didn't mean to crosspost that was just meant for
dain... I need ot fix Thunderbird's auto completion db...
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
ROTFL
Original Message
Subject: Re: Please change Open JPA to OpenJPA
Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 11:32:53 -0700
ROTFL
Original Message
Subject: Re: Please change Open JPA to OpenJPA
Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 11:32:53 -0700
From: Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
References:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EM
it in my head that it was inflight for
release, and was surprised with Aaron's suggestion that more work be
done in 1.1.
I understand now. Thanks
geir
Matt
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Please do any work in the 1.1 branch. Right now 1.2 is in a very
uncertain stat
Aaron Mulder wrote:
Please do any work in the 1.1 branch. Right now 1.2 is in a very
uncertain state. Though, I suspect the issues will be different in
1.1, so you may want to start by testing the same things there.
IIRC, the hot deployer does not yet check the timestamp of the
deployments i
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 5/3/06, Hernan Cunico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most of the documentation was uploaded into a JIRA and granted ASF
license long time ago. I say most
because the last updates have not been yet uploaded. Once we have
cwiki.apache.org in production the
license should no
Jeff Genender wrote:
Anyone know of any Geronimo BOFs at JavaOne this year? If not, any
interest on getting one together?
Yes - I asked for a slot late and I think we have it. More as I know it.
geir
I haven't seen or heard of any from our community here. I think it
would be great to g
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
I am volunteering to research with Infra to find out what it would
take. I think we at least need to understand what is possible and not
simply speculate on it.
Speaking w/ my infra hat, there is a strong aversion to single-sourcing
resources on ASF infra when they can
I'll be there
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Thought I'd start a thread to see which of the committers will be a Java
One. I seem to remember seeing a note about getting together to discuss
where we're at and where we're going but I don't remember seeing a
whose who in the zoo list. If your going to
Aaron Mulder wrote:
I have to disagree with putting up an ASF option as the default.
Let's say there are 50 plugins produced by Apache and 70 by outsiders.
We have a choice to make the default a repository containing 50
entries, or a repository containing 120 entries. What makes sense?
Her
Congrats! :)
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
In recognition of his contributions and participation in the Apache
Geronimo community, the Geronimo PMC is proud to announce the
committership of Rick McGuire.
Rick has contributed in many places, and is a pleasure to work with, and
we look
In recognition of his contributions and participation in the Apache
Geronimo community, the Geronimo PMC is proud to announce the
committership of Rick McGuire.
Rick has contributed in many places, and is a pleasure to work with, and
we look forward to his continued involvement as a committer
+1
and I agree with Aaron about being flexible about ship date
Any interest in releasing/announcing at JavaOne?
geir
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
I'd like to propose we close 1.1 and start putting the wrapping tape on
the box. There have been new features / functions coming in and at some
p
Sam Ruby wrote:
What I am unconfortable with is codebases being proposed with a
precondition being placed on where they land.
A sponsor is needed to inject a bit of accountability into the process,
and to reduce the tendency towards the ASF becoming a sourceforge with
lots of abandoned projec
Exactly the right question - the copyright isn't the issue, but the
license is.
Where did these schemas come from, and what are the listed terms?
geir
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
2006/3/9, Bill Stoddard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Don't change the copyright statements. The only tim
if the comments are part of someone else's copyrighted material, and
it's not under a permissive open source license, please don't copy them.
geir
Bill Dudney wrote:
So I will go ahead and type the comments (I'm more than half way through
it anyway) and then we can delete them if we need to.
+1
Sachin Patel wrote:
Please vote on the release of the eclipse plugin for Geronimo 1.0.0.
Keep in mind a update manager patch will be made available to support
1.0.1 after it is released.
[+1] Release v1.0.0 of the eclipse plugin supporting G 1.0
[-1] Do not release, v1.0.0.
- sachin
David Blevins wrote:
On Feb 14, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
How can XBean be out of scope but modules/kernel is not?
If we're going to switch Geronimo over to XBean, then yes, it's in
scope. But the answers to my question never said tha
- thanks for just saying it
plainly and clearly.
Amen.
geir
Aaron
On 2/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just to tie this up so it won't be left hanging - since Dain has already
started moving forward with the ip document in incubator and declared
his intention
this always reminds me of the old jokes about the country that wanted to
do a piecemeal switch from "wheel on the right" cars to "wheel on the
left" cars...
David Blevins wrote:
On Feb 14, 2006, at 2:03 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On 2/14/2006 3:09 AM, Anders Hessellund Jensen (Trifork) wrot
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 2/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the same way that we built Geronimo from "best of breed" J2EE-ish OSS
projects that are out there, I'm sure we could do a similar thing with BPEL.
Maybe do a "bake off" to help find
so we welcome that type of open
discussion.
That's why I'm bringing it up here :)
Good luck with it.
geir
On 2/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bill Flood wrote:
Geir, approaching Agila was our first avenue. We looked at what they
had
and I initiated
Bill Flood wrote:
Geir, approaching Agila was our first avenue. We looked at what they had
and I initiated several conversations about donating to that incubator
project.
We offered a base line upon which to build but there did not seem to be any
uptake although both committers said they were
Why not just bring into Agila and work on it in there?
Bill Flood wrote:
Dims,
We heard your plea and have moved the proposal through the incubator as you
suggested. At this point, we are looking for supporters. From the energy
you put behind your posting, we are all hoping you will also be c
s/bpe/
If the community goes forward with the project, in one form or another, we
are prepared to immediately change the license to the Apache form and modify
the package names spaces as appropriate.
thanks
On 2/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wasn't it of
Wasn't it offered already to ServiceMix?
I mean, people already voted on accepting the code, so I assume it's
available somewhere...
geir
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great!
I'm assuming the source won't be available for review unless/until Ode is
accepted as an incubator poddling?
Ian
It's
ring it back
to Geronimo last summer when he first took it to Codehaus - but I think
that the motivations for bringing in code that is out of main scope of
the project deserves some illumination.
geir
James Strachan wrote:
On 1 Feb 2006, at 15:53, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I asked a while a
The Geronimo PMC needs to vote on sponsoring this.
Before you do that, just to start the discussion :
- Why would the Geronimo PMC sponsor this?
- Isn't BPEL a bit far afield from J2EE, which is our charter as a PMC?
- How about bringing it to Agila, which already has a good start on BPEL
and w
Kuato wrote:
If someone doesnt remove me from this fucking distribution list the
porno will be flying fast and furious soon.
Fix your fucking unsubscribe script!!! (For the 100th time)
Sometimes the internets are hard. I've unsubscribed you. This was the
first request I saw. Sorry for y
James Strachan wrote:
We have received the generous donation of a complete and working BPE
engine to the ServiceMix project...
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-servicemix-dev/200602.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the contributor has offered to donate to Apache & complete the necessa
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
Hi James,
We're not sucking in another project. Its a contribution of code
only. How is this any different than has already happened on
Geronimo, Agila (twister), Harmony etc?
Geronimo is not an incubating project and hence can bring more stuff in.
The Agila/Tw
how does that make any sense?
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Then start the BPEL project under Geronimo. *NOT* under ServiceMix.
-- dims
On 2/3/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3 Feb 2006, at 15:08, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James S
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
This is all hypothetical; I don't know if there *are* people
who'd want to work on it but not ServiceMix, and I have
to take on faith the remarks that there are other packages
that would like a BPEL engine without ServiceMix attached.
I don't think you need much
that it does.
I'm sure it does great things. That wasn't my question. I'll continue
this in the other thread on it...
geir
Regards,
Alan
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote, On 2/1/2006 7:53 AM:
I asked a while ago and I think my question was never answered -
why bring XBean
I actually did read the spec and type in the classes once. (I think it
was for the timer spec...?)
I believe that if we do that, we have no problems because of the
copyright notice in the spec.
I've also discussed this issue regarding the lack of any recognizable
license for their code w/ B
What's the timing? I ask with motivated by the thought that the sooner
it happens, the fewer people will be affected...
geir
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
There was some discussion on Irc earlier this week about the issue
related to plans having to be changed due to module versions changing.
This i
I was sick and traveling the past few days, so I missed the whole vote.
I'm not necessarily against it, but worried about pointless growth - my
only question is "why bring this in?" It's good code and all, but
normally we try to draw some line between the existing project's goals
and what the
I asked a while ago and I think my question was never answered -
why bring XBean into Geronimo?
geir
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
The XBean project has voted to donate all of the code located at
https://svn.codehaus.org/xbean (view with fisheye
http://cvs.codehaus.org/viewrep/xbean) to Apache Geron
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
2006/1/23, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I don't understand - The need for documentation under source control is
important, and we need to find a solution that ensure that is possible.
I think that a documentation system should be a com
David Jencks wrote:
in my understanding of "the apache way", one of the important principles
is that all decisions happen on the mailing list. To me, for Geronimo,
that means that if you are working on a feature more complex than a
simple bug fix, you describe it in general terms in an email
Jason Dillon wrote:
I think that a documentation system should be a combination of
- reasonably easy to use
- versionable
- able to be used offline
- extractable into an open and transformable format for reuse
Wikis that I've used fail on #2, #3 and #4.
Confluence (as well as other mature wi
Catching up :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. You license the code to the Apache Software Foundation giving
the foundation the rights to relicense under any license (so the
foundation can upgrade the license as they did with ASL2). We do ask
that you change the copyrights on the version of the co
I don't understand - The need for documentation under source control is
important, and we need to find a solution that ensure that is possible.
I think that a documentation system should be a combination of
- reasonably easy to use
- versionable
- able to be used offline
- extractable into an o
When projects start in incubator, yes - anyone on the initial committer
list is given committer status on the incubating project. Because
Geronimo may/is sponsor/ing this as a subproject, when the incubator
project graduates, all committers become Geronimo committers.
You can see an example o
How do you see this fitting into the scope of Geronimo?
geir
Dain Sundstrom (JIRA) wrote:
Donation of XBean source
Key: GERONIMO-1478
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1478
Project: Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Reporter
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
I believe it is safe to say that Geronimo has been operating
in CTR mode, but I think the specifics and ground rules may
not have been spelt out, or need to be again. Is this the
way in which the majority wants to continue to proceed?
I believe that most Apache
For G 1.0, what was the version of linux used?
Java Compatibility Certification Request Form
Date: 2006-01-05
Product Name: Apache Geronimo
Product Version: 1.0
Product Description: J2EE 1.4 Application Server
J2SE Version tested with: 1.4.2
CTS/TCK Versi
I'm not sure that's true if changes were made post the initial vote.
Formally, you want the PMC to vote on what is going to be released, and
if it changed from the "lets do a release" to "here's the release", we
want the additional vote to at least protect the release manager - that
person is t
o not release 1.0 (Reasons included)
Does it pass the TCK? I will vote no until it does.
Regards,
Alan
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Do not release 1.0 (Reasons included)
Looks like we got through the last remaining significant bugs and
thansk to all
who worked up to the end to get this release out there.
Matt
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
2006/1/4, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Nice work. My preference would be RFC822. However, I do wonder how
many people might get bitten by this - that are depending on the broken
behavior. Sun's JavaMail has been around for quite a whil
Rick McGuire wrote:
I'm trying to write a fuller implementation of the
InternetAddress.parseHeader() method for the Geronimo javamail
implementation. I've been writing some tests to see how the Sun
javamail implementation is handling various addresses, and then rolling
these tests into the
contribute your time to
Apache Geronimo ;)
Cheers,
Jacek
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+
+rowspan="" valign="top" align="left">
+
+IBM
+
+
+
+
+rowspan="" valign="top
219.tar.gz
What's the idea behind this naming scheme for the zips/tgzs?
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
print database (derby) only, instead of
big J2EE application and
if it possible can anyone provide guide or a demo
example on the wiki web
site.
Some people like mini cooper over big SUV car.
That's what Tomcat is for.
Wade
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and IMO
putting out a 1.0 that we know isn't ready doesn't get us closer to
that goal of community trust. There's been a little under 2.5 years
of tremendous passion and energy from many many people that went into
this.
geir
On Dec 18, 2005, at 6:39 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
fixed the issue of
spaces in the names of certain files in the documentation.
I'm not totally clear whether Matt wanted more input or whether he's
made his final decision as release manager, but I would assume that if
anyone feels strongly that the plan above is a mistake then they
shoul
hment.
geir
On Dec 18, 2005, at 3:25 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
-1 to doing an rc
Lets do 1.0.0 now and 1.0.1 in two weeks.
-dain
On Dec 18, 2005, at 12:16 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
+1
Do an RC and publicize it. We'll get a surge of interest. Let
people beat the tar out of it.
21805\geronimo-1.0\bin>if """" == """" goto
doneSetArgs
C:\matt_spin_121805\geronimo-1.0\bin>call
"c:\matt_spin_121805\geronimo-1.0\bin\
geronimo.bat" start
Using GERONIMO_BASE: c:\matt_spin_121805\geronimo-1.0
Using GERONIMO_HOME: c:\matt_spin_121805\geronimo-1.0
Using GERONIMO_TMPDIR: c:\matt_spin_121805\geronimo-1.0\var\temp
Using JRE_HOME:c:\j2sdk1.4.2_08
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Dec 16, 2005, at 5:12 PM, Dave Colasurdo wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
It's an interesting problem. I know the PRC is thinking about it
too. I've never seen an OSS project issue a retraction, but that
may be something worth considering...
The geronimo website properly
know the PRC is thinking about it
too. I've never seen an OSS project issue a retraction, but that may
be something worth considering...
geir
Thanks.
Matt
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tunate that the
release went out when we were clearly not ready. Thoughts on how
to address that issue?
Yes.
geir
Matt
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
subject line says it all. We also need to figure out what to do
about the press release...
geir
On Dec 16, 2005, at 7:59 AM, Sachin Patel
subject line says it all. We also need to figure out what to do
about the press release...
geir
On Dec 16, 2005, at 7:59 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
Due to amount of problems reported, I too change my vote to a -1.
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
:
- tar (GNU tar) 1.15.1
- Zip 2.3 (November 29th 1999)
- OpenSSL 0.9.7f 22 Mar 2005
- gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.1
[ ] +1 Release these binaries provided they pass the J2EE TCK
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
Let's get this thing out the door!
-David
--
Geir Magnuss
these binaries provided they pass the J2EE TCK
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
Let's get this thing out the door!
-David
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
aries
[ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
~ Matt
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(provide specific comments)
~ Matt
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-627?page=all ]
Geir Magnusson Jr closed GERONIMO-627:
--
Resolution: Fixed
fixed. done. I heart forrest
> Geronimo Incubator Web Page Must
the community wants. If the community wants Jetty, give
it to
them. If they want Tomcat, then let them have this. Let the
community
decide.
Cheers,
Erin
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Dec 9, 2005, at 3:19 AM, John Sisson wrote:
There are other ways to do documentation that can be exported to
both PDF and HTML. These other methods also allow documentaton
(the manuals) to be edited off-line and stored in svn.
+1 :)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr
omeone can provide a good reason
why it
shouldn't be.
FYI - it's been decided that installation of both web containers
via the
installer will not be allowed. Manual configuration of both is
possible
though.
--
Regards,
Erik
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1
s an informal, fun setting...
Thoughts?
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 808 matches
Mail list logo
