Re: New Name for UIMA Podling?
robert burrell donkin wrote: On 10/27/06, Sami Siren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marshall Schor wrote: The most popular way to pronounce UIMA is you-eee-muh. There is a fairly large user community using pre-Apache UIMA. The potential confusion about which UIMA people may be talking about may be mitigated somewhat by versioning. The pre-Apache releases are numbered 1.x.x; the Apache ones will be numbered as 2.x.x and higher. (We are showing a beta level of 2.x in pre-Apache form, but will transition users as rapidly as possible to the the Apache one, once we get set up and going in Apache). If we rename it, this might cause some confusion itself - it would appear that there were 2 different things, rather than one thing that was moving from its previous environment to Apache. I'm not sure what would be more confusing - having a new name, or having users understand that the project has moved to Apache. I don't understand the problem here. Is UIMA going to be something different when it moves to apache? who knows? UIMA is not going to be something different when it moves to Apache, but one big change for all pre-Apache UIMA users is the Apache style Java package naming that we do for Apache UIMA. So the public interfaces for the UIMA solution development changed. This means the the pre-Apache UIMA version is not exactly compatible to the Apache UIMA version. So solutions around UIMA must be adapted between these two versions. But this change should be independent of the new name. most projects grow and evolve during incubation. some of this is driven by apache, some is driven by the community themselves taking the opportunity for reflection. and why should users care where the project is hosted? existing users may not but some new users may well do. in particular, apache has a reputation for paying attention to legal issues and for open development. organisations often approve the use of apache products en mass. If you ask me - Just keep the name. the name will need to change anyway: it will need to be 'Apache XXX' (for trademark reasons). so, the question (for the community) is whether to move to Apache UIMA or something else. - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Some additional information to my person: I am a member of the original UIMA development team and will be on the initial committer list for UIMA on Apache. Thanks Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wicket interim release
On Oct 29, 2006, at 5:37 AM, Upayavira wrote: The Wicket community is attempting to steer a difficult course between supporting its existing users and also entering Incubation. The community is committed to incubation within Apache, but at the same time wishes to make the transition for its users as manageable as possible. It has been decided that incubator releases will start with the 1.3 branch, as 1.2 is more or less in maintenance mode, but also contains some licensing issues that would make it difficult to release as an incubator release. Therefore, this email is to inform the Incubator PMC that the wicket community are planning to make a release, independent of Apache and the Incubator, for release 1.2.3. Great, no problems there. It isn't even necessary to mention Apache. The following notice will be included in the release. NOTICE.txt: Er, no, that's wrong. Assuming it is using the Apache License, the only things that should be in NOTICE are mandatory credit/notice items that you expect all downstream redistributors to include. In other words, the content of an About... style dialog, wherein the contents are required for redisplay by others. If a disclaimer is desired, just put it in the README file. Roy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JiniProposal - BraintreeProposal
On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Jim Hurley wrote: On Oct 25, 2006, at 6:35 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Greg Stein wrote: It doesn't matter whatsoever as long as you are VERY consistently calling it Apache Braintree as you should be doing _anyways_ Would that apply equally to the two names that were more highly rated by the JINI community than the one selected? What is the criteria? This topic comes up quite often. --- Noel Does this same criteria apply to any name? I'm questioning whether I understand the rules, so some clarification would really help. Ah, crap, more mystery advice. A trademark is still a trademark -- adding Apache on the front only makes the use possessive of the mark, which is even more likely to get us sued than just using it plain. As a general rule, consider what some big-angry-corp would do if we did the same with their name. For example, Apache Java or Apache Windows, both of which would result in a cease-and-desist letter in short order. I thought for a second that Braintree would be clear of trademark, but it isn't now: http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serialentry=78891872 which is a recent application. So, once again we are back where we started -- it is safe to go ahead and start the podling as braintree, but it is most likely to end up being renamed to jini before it graduates (assuming that Sun does transfer the mark). Roy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RESULT} Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)
Tallying the results (in the order that Thunderbird sorted them), we had
+1 from Geir, Dims, Robert, Noel, Jean, Sanjiva, Greg, Paul, Cliff, Ted,
Tim, Craig, Leo, Yoav, Bill, Ken, Matthias, David, Niall, Roy
Note that Justin and Sam voted in other threads (as well as on the board
vote :). If I left anyone else off of this list, I apologize.
So with that, and with board approval granted, The Incubator PMC
graduates the Harmony podling.
Thanks all for the patience - I do think we have some things to chat
about :)
geir
try {
transaction.begin();
getIncubatorApproval(transaction);
getBoardApproval(transaction);
transaction.commit();
}
catch(RollbackException re) {
continueIncubation();
}
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
The Apache Harmony community has voted to request graduation
from the Incubator as a TLP.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/
200610.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The following votes have been recorded (in order of votes cast) :
+1 Geir Magnusson Jr (Incubator PMC/committer/mentor)
+1 Etienne Gagnon
+1 Gregory Shimansky (committer)
+1 Sam Ruby (Incubator PMC)
+1 Rana Dasgupta
+1 Danese Cooper
+1 Mark Hindess (committer)
+1 Alex Blewitt
+1 Mikhail Fursov
+1 Matthias Wessendorf
+1 Alexei A Fedotov
+1 Jorden Justen
+1 Andrew Zhang
+1 Leo Li
+1 Nathan Beyer (committer)
+1 Naveen Neelakantam
+1 Mikhail Loenko(committer)
+1 Leo Simons(Incubator PMC/mentor)
+1 Paulex Yang (committer)
+1 Tim Ellison (committer)
+1 Salikh Zakirov
+1 Alex Karasulu (Incubator PMC)
+1 Weldon Washburn (committer)
+1 Sergey Soldatov
+1 Nadya Morozova
+1 Robert Burrell Donkin (Incubator PMC)
+1 Richard Liang (committer)
+1 Vladimir Ivanov
+1 Dan Lydick(committer)
+1 Tony Wu
+1 Spark Shen
+1 Rui Hu
+1 Pavel Rebriy
+1 Pavel Ozhdikhin
+1 Jimmy Jing
+1 Xiao-Feng Li
+1 Alexey A Ivanov
+1 Pavel Pervov
+1 Sian January
+1 Pavel Afremov
+1 Alexei Zakharov(committer)
+1 Stefano Mazzocchi (Incubator PMC/mentor)
+1 Davanum Srinivas (Incubator PMC/mentor)
+1 Svetlana Konovalova
+1 Egor Pasko
+1 Stepan Mishura (committer)
+1 Ilya Okomin
Under the Incubator process, Harmony must have a destination prior
to exiting incubation, which means the ASF Board must decide whether or
not create a TLP for Apache Harmony prior to the Incubator vote being
official. However, I suspect that the board would want some indication
that we are ready to graduate first.
So, I am asking for a vote of the Incubator on graduation of Harmony
that is conditional on the board's approval of a TLP for that purpose.
This way we don't have to vote again after the board meeting on
Wednesday (or whenever the board considers the proposal).
Please send in your +1/0/-1 to approve/abstain/disapprove.
Status: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/harmony.html
Site: http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/
List: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/
geir
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Name for UIMA Podling?
Based on information in the notes about the Braintree proposal, I used the service at the US Patent and Trademark office to look up UIMA - it generates no hits. Honu (one of the alternative names earlier proposed) generates several hits - it's a live trademark. You can try this at www.uspto.gov and clicking in the left menu bar under Search Trademarks. -Marshall Schor - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] Release Apache ActiveMQ 4.0.2 (RC 6)
Some last minute NOTICE issues were still present in the 5th release candidate of the 4.0.2 build. We have also received confirmation from Apache legal discuss that it's ok to include work covered by the Creative Commons Attribution license. I have cut and RC 6 of the 4.0.2 build with the fixes and it's available here: http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0.2-RC6/maven1/incubator-activemq/distributions/ Maven 1 and Maven 2 repos for this release can be found at: http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0.2-RC6 Here's the wiki page for the release notes: http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/activemq-402-release.html Please vote to approve this release binary [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 4.0.2 [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments) This vote is being cross posted to the general incubator mailing list also to expedite the voting process. Here's my +1 -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
