[ANN] Tapestry 3.0 rc1 released

Tapestry 3.0 Release Candidate 1 has been released. -Harish - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [ANN] Tapestry 3.0 rc1 released

to the vote thread on the project's -dev list. -- Martin Cooper On Mar 17, 2004, at 6:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was there a vote for it? -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 17/03/2004 11:55:38 PM: Tapestry 3.0 Release Candidate 1 has

Re: [VOTE] HiveMind as a Jakarta sub-project

Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: All Jakarta Community Members : Howard M. Lewis Ship, on behalf of the committers of the HiveMind project in the Jakarta Commons sandbox, has proposed HiveMind as a Jakarta sub-project. The proposal was sent to this list, a copy of which can be found here :

Re: push vs. pull

AFAIK, the only ones that use PUSH model are Barracuda and Echo. -Harish Alejandra Gos wrote: Hi, I would like to know if someone could tell me which one of these two models Push, Pull, Struts follows. Thanks - To

Re: Extending the PMC ( was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status)

Anything happening in this regard? -Harish Costin Manolache wrote: Ted Husted wrote: Right now, the only plan seems to be to nominate committers one-by-one on the PMC list. I'm just saying that we shouldn't play favorites. I believe all Jakarta committers have already earned membership in

Re: Extending the PMC ( was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status)

Thanks, will results be posted here? -Harish Henri Yandell wrote: A vote is on-going at the moment [ends Sunday] for 20 or so people, but I've not heard of any movement on the plans to increase in a more aggressive way. Hen On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: Anything happening

Re: Extending the PMC ( was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status)

that is enforced is the board part, so until someone appears in committee-info, they're not technically on the PMC. There's a /committers/pmc/jakarta/pmc-pending.txt file which shows who is currently waiting addition to the committee-info. Ideas? Hen On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote

Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Dec 30, 2003, at 8:37 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: Martin Cooper wrote: This doesn't seem quite right to me. I agree that when we have voted in a new committer, both the existing committers and the new committer have had the same expectations with respect

Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status

Martin Cooper wrote: On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Ted Husted wrote: - Original message From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:05:11 -0500 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively

Re: [License] for jars in CVS

I am with Erik on no JARs in CVS. Unless it is a legal issue, I would certainly like to distribute all JARs with the distribution. It saves a lot of hassle and keeps uncessary traffic out of the user-list. -Harish Erik Hatcher wrote: In jakarta-tapestry/lib/ext lives all of the licenses of

Re: [License] for jars in CVS

I see what you are saying, but why is this an issue only with OGNL? Is it because of license incompatibilities? 'Cause there are other jars in CVS both Apache and non-Apache. -Harish Danny Angus wrote: I am with Erik on no JARs in CVS. Unless it is a legal issue, I would certainly like to

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

like what we now have is pretty much in good shape and only means that the following actions take place... * Reorganize Jakarta (and may be others??) * Enforce project level PMC membership Just my thoughts. Regards, Harish Craig R. McClanahan wrote: Quoting Harish Krishnaswamy [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Just in case you're curious

For the record I'm in favour of transacting business HERE. But I would like to respond by saying that as I understand it it is the source and the development of it which is open, not the organisation. As a committer I would like to know what's going on with the origanization. I can understand

Re: Just in case you're curious

First off, as a commiter your entitled to be proposed for membership of the PMC, which I'd be happy to do. Thanks for the offer but I don't know if I would qualify for one. The description on the website is pretty broad. Secondly there has been a long drawn out debate in numerous places

Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

will be taking on as a member and if I will be eligible. Thanks, Harish Noel J. Bergman wrote: Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: First off, as a commiter your entitled to be proposed for membership of the PMC, which I'd be happy to do. Thanks for the offer but I don't know if I would qualify for one

Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

Henri Yandell wrote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: If the aim of the PMC is to house a vast majority of committers, and if the role of a PMC member is simply to follow some guidelines and regulate development, I don't see the distinction between a PMC member and a committer

Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

Ah now it all makes sense :) May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be no reason to lobby for more members, really. -Harish Noel J. Bergman wrote: I don't see the distinction between a PMC member and a committer. grin You catch on quickly. :-) The difference is

Volunteering for PMC membership

Hi, I, Harish Krishnaswamy (harishkswamy), a Tapestry committer, would like to help grow Jakarta in whatever capacity I can and I request my nomination for PMC membership. Regards, Harish - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL

Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Dec 18, 2003, at 3:08 PM, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: Ah now it all makes sense :) May be this should be included with the CLA and then there would be no reason to lobby for more members, really. We want to make sure that the PMC members are committers who

Re: Confused with PMCs, TLPs, ASF and Power?

Very nice, this really clarifies the organizational structure and issues at hand. Thanks, Harish Stephen Colebourne wrote: Then try this: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPMCPropsedChanges It aims to be a starter course on why discssions about PMCs, TLPs, Jakarta and the ASF

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

How about Jakarta = Java Development? Then, they all seem in place, no? -Harish Henri Yandell wrote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Costin Manolache wrote: IMO it would be sad if projects like struts or tapestry leave jakarta - since they are closely related to web development and server side java (

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

[or be fast-tracked with the board's new scheme Greg mentioned], is the community inviting them in as important as it used to be. I'd much rather find a real subtitle for Jakarta that fits well [Cocoon is Java web development, but only indirectly I think, ditto for Avalon]. Hen On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish

Re: Why you *want* to be on the PMC

PMC exists, all other PMCs [jakarta sub-project based] are accepting the Jakarta Site PMC's oversight over their websites. Why is this a problem? I think it is good to be that way. How is Apache website handled btw? May be we can follow suit? -Harish Hen On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Harish Krishnaswamy

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

that you might want to look things up. After all, the one layer (TLP) structure didn't harm Ant or James, and almost certainly benefitted Maven, Avalon and from the looks of it Log4J. In the end, actions will speak louder than words. Stephen - Original Message - From: Harish Krishnaswamy

Re: Jakarta: Confederation or Single Project?

Could someone please explain the motivation behind the creation of Jakarta and how it got to where it is today? May be that would help answer some of the questions we have? -Harish - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]