Just a quick Email... the list has been pretty quiet
lately and just pinging to see who's still watching
and reading :)
If possible ;)
On Apr 15, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
> On 04/15/2013 03:35 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Just a quick Email... the list has been pretty quiet
>> lately and just pinging to see who's still watching
>> and reading :)
>>
>
>
Anyone wish to add anything? Is the project dead and attic
bound, or is it not?
On Apr 15, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Just a quick Email... the list has been pretty quiet
>> lately and just pinging to
I am stepping down as Chair of the C++ StdLib PMC.
So the question is: Does this project and community
elect a new Chair, or does it enter the Attic?
On May 29, 2013, at 5:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> But to be chair, one needs to be a member of the foundation.
That's not true.
On May 30, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The chair of the PMC is appointed by the Board and is an officer
> of the ASF (Vice President).
>
> Does an officer of the ASF not have to be a member?
>
Not, s/he does not. There are a handful of such cases where the
PMC Chair is not a
The PMC report is due at this month's meeting...
so what's the word? Should we propose a new chair??
On May 31, 2013, at 7:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On May 30, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>>
>> The chair of the PMC is appointed by the Bo
I'll add a resolution for next week's board mtg.
On Jun 7, 2013, at 9:22 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
> On 06/ 7/13 08:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> The PMC report is due at this month's meeting...
>>
>> so what's the word? Should we propose a new chair
The ASF was asked to comment on the move of the project to the Attic.
The below is what was sent.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jim Jagielski
> Subject: Re: [Contact] Media question
> To: Serdar Yegulalp
>
> No worries. Here it is again.
>
> One of the core goals of
On Aug 6, 2013, at 11:50 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
>
> The Apache way didn't work for this project and instead of trying to think
> outside the box... Some passionate people (primarily you?) decided it was
> better to close it.
If the Apache way didn't work for this project then the *only*
opti
It looks as though they want a 2nd chance...
On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Since the PMC appears unable to operate as it should, unless I
>> hear a compelling reason otherwise, I will add a resolution to
>> move C++ to the atti
is this thing on?
Just checking :)
Since being tasked as chair, I've seen no activity. There was
an email from Bill regarding 2 "outstanding" iCLAs, but the response
from one of the "committers" was less than optimistic.
That's it. No Emails on dev@ or private@, no code activities,
really no evidence at all of "renewed" interest/he
uot;. So, here I am, contacting the stdcxx PMC about @private. I
> would appreciate an answer.
I defer to Bill (Bill Rowe, that is) regarding whether he is willing
to share his emails.
>
>
>>> 3. There was a recent and important PMC change at stdcxx.
>>> Congratulat
Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
Should I call a vote to move C++ to the Attic? Or is there someone
who feels that the project should still exist *and* is willing
to stand as chair?
On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
> On 08/29/12 10:54, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Looking over the lack of activity within this project, it's
>> obvious (at least to me), that maybe its day is done.
>>
>> Should I call a vote to move C++ to the A
ters have been added to the project. Congratulations!
>>> Could one of you please update the stdcxx list of committers?
>>
>> I don't mean to punt but I think Jim Jagielski maintains a separate
>> link with the correct list of committers:
>>
>>
>>
On Aug 30, 2012, at 6:48 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
> I'm sincerely sorry to ask this and I have my own answers, but why continue
> STDCXX when such negativity from Apache is apparent..
>
What "negativity" are you seeing? I'm not seeing any, certainly
nothing that is "apparent"?
> Will Apache c
On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:36 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> There's always good traffic when this topic comes up. Thanks
> to Jim who's made it his mission to pull the plug on STDCXX.
> I think this must be his third or fourth proposal to vote the
> project into the attic.
>
No, it's not my mission.
On Aug 30, 2012, at 5:45 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
> ---
> The facts as I know it
> 1) Our fork is maintained (continuous bug fixes - which we won't submit to
> Apache now)
Why?
> 2) Stefan is putting in some work (one man army)
Hardly a healthy community if just 1 person is "putting in
On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
> While STDCXX is at Apache it will never be BSD licensed. Solution - move it
> away from Apache foundation and have them transfer some of the additional
> rights they received to allow recipient foundation to relicense. I thought
> this would
On Aug 31, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Wojciech Meyer wrote:
> Jim Jagielski writes:
>
>> So how are/were they committers??
>
> Hi!
>
> Chime in - I think we need to clarify what kind of problems we have with
> stdcxx being hosted as an Apache project.
>
> The two
On Aug 31, 2012, at 8:40 AM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
>
> Stefan's seem like a complete git-ification of the whole Apache repository
> but with no changes I could detect.
>
FWIW, The ASF supports git so if people think it would help,
all we'd need to do is ask #infra to move stdcxx to git.
The idea that ALv2 projects can't be added to FreeBSD ports is complete and
total hogwash. Pure FUD.
On Aug 31, 2012, at 8:43 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
> On 08/31/12 07:20 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 2012, at 8:00 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
>>> While STDCXX is at
Are you suggesting that FreeBSD does not allow the inclusion of ANY
ALv2 library under its ports directory?
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:19 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> Do they come bundled with the compiler and link against every c++ application
> by default? I suspect that their risk assessment may b
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:38 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> On 09/ 1/12 01:35 AM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:27 PM, "C. Bergström"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> stdcxx ends up linking against *EVERY* C++ application if it's used in the
>>> default compiler setup. (Which is what I was try
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:27 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> On 09/ 1/12 01:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Are you suggesting that FreeBSD does not allow the inclusion of ANY
>> ALv2 library under its ports directory?
> I'll give you the benefit of the a doubt one
On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:41 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> On 09/ 1/12 01:28 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot push stdcxx as part
>> of the FreeBSD ports collection. And that is because it is licensed
>> under ALv2.
>>
>
On Aug 31, 2012, at 3:16 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
> On 09/ 1/12 02:01 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:41 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/ 1/12 01:28 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot
On Aug 31, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2012, at 3:16 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
>
>> On 09/ 1/12 02:01 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:41 PM, "C. Bergström"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On
On Aug 31, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Wojciech Meyer
wrote:
> Jim Jagielski writes:
>
>> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:27 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/ 1/12 01:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> Are you suggesting that FreeBSD does not allow the i
On Aug 31, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Wojciech Meyer
wrote:
> Libstc++
> is LGPL therefore can link with GPL project, and can link with ALv2
> project, but stdcxx is ALv2 and cannot link with GPL project.
>
> That's basically what LGPL was designed for, to solve this problem.
>
Nope... LGPL was desig
On Sep 2, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 08/31/2012 02:38 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
>> My input below.
>>
>> On 08/31/12 09:42, Wojciech Meyer wrote:
>>> The two significant ones (as far as I can understand):
>>>
>>> - as I heard from Christopher Bergström that it's hard to push th
Your suggestion is that, somehow, one cannot push stdcxx as part
of the FreeBSD ports collection. And that is because it is licensed
under ALv2.
My response is that that suggestion is total hogwash.
As an ASF project? It's not going to happen.
On Sep 4, 2012, at 12:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 09/02/2012 08:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 2, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/31/2012 02:38 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
>>
6, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 09/06/2012 07:22 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> As an ASF project? It's not going to happen.
>
> Not necessarily as an ASF project. Christopher is interested
> in moving the project somewhere else. See for example:
>
> ht
Trivial fixes should just be fixed... the normal expectation is
that bug reports are for non-trivial bugs or for trivial (and
non-trivial) bugs reported from the outside.
If a committers sees a bug, just go ahead and fix it, and
document the fix in a commit log, changefile, etc ;)
On Sep 6, 2012,
Just a few points:
1. No single individual can "make a process more formal". If the
project itself wants more process, and to make it more formal,
then all is good. If a single committer decides on his/her
own to add process *which is not formally required by the
ASF* then committ
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>board@
>
> 2. ASF Projects are, well, ASF projects. They are external
>adjuncts of corporate projects,
Major typo: It should read: They are NOT external adjuncts of corporate
projects.
Many projects have CTR on trunk and RTC (based on trunk revisions)
to branch. This works well.
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:40 AM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
> On 09/06/12 23:00, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> Every project has certain branch strategy, I'm not sure about this so
>>> maybe Martin can advice. I prefer
It's time for our report to the board...
what would we like to share?
I see:
o renewed discussion on health/viability of pmc
o increased development being done
o PMC expressing interest in moving to git
DESCRIPTION
Apache STDCXX is a collection of algorithms, containers, iterators,
and other fundamental components of every piece of software, implemented
as C++ classes, templates, and functions essential for writing C++ programs.
RELEASES
* There has not been a release of stdcxx since 2008. Rene
On Sep 12, 2012, at 9:51 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
> On 09/12/12 05:39 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> DESCRIPTION
>>
>> * There was some licensing FUD discussed on the list, mostly to promote
>> a "rationale" for moving the project elsewhere and/or releasing
On Sep 13, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 9:51 AM, C. Bergström wrote:
>
>> On 09/12/12 05:39 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> DESCRIPTION
>>>
>>> * There was some licensing FUD discussed on the list, mostly to promote
On Sep 13, 2012, at 8:43 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Is this all about your point of view that even though Apache stdcxx
> is designed as a library, esp as a system library, that GPLv2 programs
> cannot use and link to it because the FSF says that the ALv2
> is incompatible w/
On Sep 13, 2012, at 1:24 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
> On 09/13/12 07:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Is that the actionable item of which you speak? You want the ASF to "verify"
>> something in the GPLv2?
> No - We want to discuss the Apache foundation transferring t
On Sep 13, 2012, at 1:12 PM, C. Bergström wrote:
> We appreciate you telling the choir, but it doesn't help resolve this. How
> to best proceed? Is legal-discuss the best way to go forward or something
> else?
>
Why? What are you looking for? And who is the expected audience?
Again, I have
Sorry. I've been Reply-All'ing.
On Sep 13, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:12 AM, "C. Bergström"
> wrote:
>> Is legal-discuss the best way to go forward or something else?
>
> I'm not sure what the question is, but it doesn't seem like a question
> for board@
48 matches
Mail list logo
