Re: [discussion] Harmony podling to ask for vote for graduation
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 12:44, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: Thanks, and we look forward to your comments. To avoid cross-post confusion, I will forward this message to the harmony-dev list rather than CC. Amazing feat, indeed. I was very pessimistic to the start of Harmony, and am gladly proven wrong. Now, has all IP concerns been sorted out, especially to the been exposed to Sun's SCSL'd reference codebase been sorted out, both for existing committers and some process to how this is applied to new committers?? Keep up the good work. Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Name for UIMA Podling?
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 11:58:53PM +0200, Leo Simons wrote: Note UIMA is a fine name for an apache project. We have projects like +1 - there seems to have started some sort of fascination with changing names where there is no need. In general I'm not really a fan of naming things so that it is impossible to guess what a project is (that's hard enough as it is already). vh Mads Toftum -- http://soulfood.dk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Name for UIMA Podling?
The name UIMA has built up some amount of name recognition in the community where it is being adopted, so there's some advantage to not changing it. It also has an advantage of being rather short. For our project files currently on SourceForge, we used as a naming root uimaj - the j being appended to indicate the Java version of the framework. We also have a C++ enablement layer, which is part of what we'll be bringing into the incubator. These we currently manage as 2 independent but coordinated projects, from a release standpoint. Over time, we might see other implementations of the UIMA framework, in other languages (C# / .net for instance). To start, my sense is to try and keep things simple, and have one project, under one name - but thinking ahead, it's nice if that can change when and if needed into some kind of a small hierarchy of related projects, with related names. -Marshall Schor - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] Publish Yoko M1 release
The Yoko community voted on and has approved a proposal to release Yoko Milestone 1. Pursuant to the Releases section of the Incubation Policy we would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to publish the milestone on the Yoko Download page. Thanks Balaji Proposal: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-yoko-dev/200609.mbox/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] %3e Vote result: [VOTE] [RESULT] Publish Yoko M1 release http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-yoko-dev/200609.mbox/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] %3e Download from: http://people.apache.org/~bravi Releases section of the Incubation Policy: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
Re: [discussion] Harmony podling to ask for vote for graduation
Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Tuesday 17 October 2006 12:44, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: Thanks, and we look forward to your comments. To avoid cross-post confusion, I will forward this message to the harmony-dev list rather than CC. Amazing feat, indeed. I was very pessimistic to the start of Harmony, and am gladly proven wrong. Now, has all IP concerns been sorted out, especially to the been exposed to Sun's SCSL'd reference codebase been sorted out, both for existing committers and some process to how this is applied to new committers?? Yes. There never were any existing committers. We started with zero and people were voted in. (Individuals listed on the proposal had a lower bar - the just had to show participation and submit some patches/fixes). Every contributor we accept new independent material from has to complete our Authorized Contributor Questionnaire (which you can find on the website) which we keep a tiff or pdf of in SVN. I think we currently have 120 on file. Also, we ask for ACQs from all individuals that contributed to any bulk contribution - one in which software was written elsewhere and donated to us. These IP processes are built on top of the standard Apache process. geir - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] Harmony podling to ask for vote for graduation
On Tuesday October 17 2006 12:44 am, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: The PPMC of the Apache Harmony incubator podling has voted to ask for graduation from the Apache Incubator. We have enjoyed our time here with you, but feel that we don't want to overstay our welcome. We want to do our part to help make sure the ASF has more projects than the Incubator :) snip We won't have a release of this software until we are finished with Java SE 5. We may have milestone release late this quarter or in Q1 of next year, but we wish to avoid hyping the capability of what we have, and get our software stabilized and useful for general use. Users are very important to us, but we realize that there's a minimum amount of functionality and stability required before it's interesting to the casual user, and we're just reaching that point. I don't have a binding vote, but my thought is Harmony has the same issue as Felix: namely they haven't done a release or provided even a test release to the IPMC so the IPMC can be sure the podling knows the proper way to do a release and understands and can correct all the issues such as proper apache licensing, etc...Basically, make sure the podling can get all their Apache Legal Ducks in a Row. Looking at the latest snapshot downloaded from the website, there definitely are some things missing. (mainly, stuff missing from the META-INF of all the jars) Anyway, I think Harmony should first go through the process of preparing a release and get it OK'd by the IPMC. There is a LOT a podling can learn while going through that process.Since Felix was asked to create a sample release, I would expect Harmony should do the same. Anyway, those are my (non-binding) thoughts. Dan We'd like to help make this as efficient a process as possible - please let us know if there are any issues that will prevent a successful vote by the PMC on our graduation. If there are no un-addressed issues in the next 3 days, I'd like to call a vote late on Thursday, October 19th, so we can possibly be finished in time for the next Board meeting, October 25th. Thanks, and we look forward to your comments. To avoid cross-post confusion, I will forward this message to the harmony-dev list rather than CC. geir Champion and Mentor, Apache Harmony podling - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727C: 508-380-7194 F:781-902-8001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Trinidad] notice for a vote on a new committer
FYI, the vote ended, we got 4 binding +1, 2 non-binding and one more binding, after I sent out the *result* :) She sends out the fax today and so I guess she will be listed soon on Jim's page. Welcome Gabrielle Crawford! -Matthias On 10/13/06, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey guys, as mentioned in [1] we discussed on the PPMC a nominee for a new committer - Gabrielle Crawford. The real vote takes place on the *public* adffaces dev list. This mail is to keep the IPMC updated, as mentioned in [1]. I'll start the vote *after* this mail -Matthias [1] http://incubator.apache.org/learn/newcommitters.html -- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com -- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[jira] Created: (INCUBATOR-49) create a status page for UIMA
create a status page for UIMA - Key: INCUBATOR-49 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-49 Project: Incubator Issue Type: Task Components: site Reporter: Ian Holsman please create a status page for UIMA (and other stuff required to start the podling on the site). (I don't think I have the access to do this myself) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] Harmony podling to ask for vote for graduation
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 10:33, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: Will you be satisfied with a vote on posting a snapshot? I think some Incubator PMC member wants to see a 'full release' artifact for review. The podling should select a release manager producing the artifact, which the PPMC first ensure is correct and vote upon, before asking the IPMC to take a closer look. If the release artifact(s) that is/are voted Ok by the PPMC also satisfies the IPMC members, then I think noone has any further objections for graduation. Cheers Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discussion] Harmony podling to ask for vote for graduation
Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Wednesday 18 October 2006 10:33, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: Will you be satisfied with a vote on posting a snapshot? I think some Incubator PMC member wants to see a 'full release' artifact for review. The podling should select a release manager producing the artifact, which the PPMC first ensure is correct and vote upon, before asking the IPMC to take a closer look. Right now, we really don't have anything to release. Will y'all be satisfied if we go through the process for a new snapshot, pretending it's a release for Incubator purpose? If the release artifact(s) that is/are voted Ok by the PPMC also satisfies the IPMC members, then I think noone has any further objections for graduation. Given that the physical artifact is going to be the same as the snapshots we have now, can you please comment on that now so we can fix any problems before the process demonstration, so that we're don't wind up playing fetch me a rock? Note that the best practice of LICENSE and NOTICE in META-INF has been noted and addressed. geir - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
