Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I am not on the Incubator PMC, but I feel that a project still bearing
incubator status should not be permitted to make a Release.
I do not know what exactly you define as a release. Is that more than
a distribution?
An incubator project is
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I am not on the Incubator PMC, but I feel that a project still bearing
incubator status should not be permitted to make a Release.
I do not know what exactly you define as a release. Is that more than a
distribution?
Capital R. A Release
Capital R. A Release build is a specific notion within the ASF. Not
all
builds are created equal, and no one was talking about distribution from
CVS
only.
Would you mind to explain me what the specific notion means?
See http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html for the httpd project's
Steven Noels wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Should we make a poll so that we can see what others think?
Yawn.
Listen dudes: things were pretty busy when the Lenya/Xopus issue
happened - so thanks Nicola, as a member of the Cocoon PMC, for stepping
forward. Before Nicola however appeared on
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 07:56 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
...
I don't doubt it, and the proof ought to be in the ones that have
already
done so. I do ask if the PMC doing anything to help encourage other
projects to matriculate?
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
See http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html for the httpd project's
guidelines. They use the term release the way that Jakarta projects will
use the term build, but the overall effect is the same. See
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi for a description of the
Sam Ruby wrote:
Davanum Srinivas is an ASF member and an ASF officer and chair of the
web services PMC. He is very interested in the incubation of the WSRP4J
and Pluto podlings.
I would like to see him included in the incubator PMC. Let me start
things off with my: +1.
Sam, I sent a mail
Phil,
The LDAPd server in its present state could eventually support X.500 over
TCP/IP. In fact both X.500 and LDAP seem to be coming closer every day
since X.500 made the jump to using TCP/IP. I think the two will eventually
come back together. For the time being when we speak about a
Jim Jagielski wrote:
--
Andrew C. Oliver|acoliverATapache.org |2003-08-22| 144|
Nicola Ken Barozzi |nicolakenATapache.org|2003-09-19| 142|
Rodent of Unusual Si|coarATapache.org |2003-09-21| 141|
Greg Stein
Java is simply the chosen implementation platform for an RFC-compliant
server, just as C/APR is the implementation platform for the HTTP
server.
The wire-level protocol is RFC based and language neutral. The
project can
host other languages when appropriate, and would certainly provide
Phil Steitz wrote:
I would humbly suggest that there is no harm in public discussion of
incubator project proposals, understanding that the voting is private,
by the PMC. Public discussion and nonbinding statements of
support/non-support by non-PMC members could provide valuable
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 04:37 Europe/Rome, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin,
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
- it has been
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 01:26 Europe/Rome, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
I said nothing about documentation, process, policy or accountability.
LOL
We certainly agree on this!
:-)
Agree about what? that I didn't say what you previously accused me of
having said?
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric
projects that assume one implementation language is best. Those types
of projects create failure conditions that are very
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 09:04 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
The Chair of that PMC is the sponsor.
Really? I thought I was the sponsor.
Really? Didn's see you there much :-P
Which might also show how many private emails you might have missed?
Incubation is more a social operation
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 09:04 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
It has made issues that without it are simply ignored finally evident.
As for other issues, they are usually created by people complaining
here and not helping out.
I'm trying to help out
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor. From what
I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd. If the Sponsor
wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities,
otherwise they can move onto other things, having
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
another good question. i agree with roy that anyone with an
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
Noel, if you don't mind I'll also answer this.
I agree with the principle (otherwise we get back to complete PMC
incubation independence and things blow up) but there are a few things
worth asking:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Thanks, understood. In that case, I'd hold my argument, that the incubated
project requires the ability for Releases in order to attract external users
and build a community.
i disagree. the lack of a release snapshot doesn't seem to
interfere with sourceforge
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 14:15 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
You feel excluded? Well, you do not need to be. Ask to become part of
this PMC, and you'll be surprised.
I don't feel excluded, Nicola. I feel unable to get my points across.
Admittedly, I could have used a more diplomatic
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 08:39:20 -0400
(Subject: Re: roles and responsibilities)
Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) isn't the incubation more an oversight group, a task force, then a
project?
you seem to be harking back to 'projects produce code'. i disagree with
that
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
i disagree. the lack of a release snapshot doesn't seem to
interfere with sourceforge projects attracting people, and
i don't see that it would be any different here.
The lack of release snapshots on sf.net is (IMO) the best indicator, that
the project isn't
I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric
projects that assume one implementation language is best.
OK, I've seen enough language wars to understand your a priori concern.
Mind you, not
no good, alas; i'll be on the road driving to another town at that point.
i *should* be back within a couple of hours, though. :-/
Ken,
please find the #kannel IRC channel log of the debate at
http://www.kannel.org/irc-sessions/
from last friday and today.
People have raised a couple of
Berin:
Have just gone thought the changes. I like the notion of the
Sponsoring Entity at this addresses the entity into which a prodling
is destined. Perhaps we could change the name to Parent. I.e. if a
cadidate aims to be top-level, its parent would be the Board. If the
project aims to
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
i think the point is that a podling is *not* part of the
asf, and is therefore not entitled to distribute something
with the asf's name on it. if the podling graduates, i don't
see any bar to whatever packages were built during incubation
being retitled as asf ones.
Jochen,
A project is accepted into the Incubator on the hopes that it WILL become an
ASF project. However, it still needs to meet certain critera (the exit
criteria). Those criteria should include having a healthy Community, which
helps to ensure its long term survival; and having all legal
I like the notion of the Sponsoring Entity at this addresses
the entity into which a prodling is destined.
Apparently, the part that destination is an exit criteria hasn't resonated
with you. Yes, it is helpful to have an idea up front, but not in the sense
where you took it, specifically:
On 9/21/2003 10:59 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
Minimum size is not enough here. There also needs to be a diversity
requirement. For example XMLBeans must have no more than 50% of its
committers from a single organization.
Good exit criteria.
You're right, of course
On 9/22/2003 5:39 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
I don't know if we want to tackle this at the same time as Steven's
document on entering the incubator, but at the moment Im more focused
on how to get podlings out of the incubator rather than getting them in.
A while ago I proposed some exit criteria for XML beans -- I haven't
pushed them
OK, based on everything I've read from this and a few of the
other threads on this list, which I've just caught up to (I
picked a bad weekend to attend a wedding that took me off email
;-), I am going to propose to the other XMLBeans folks that we
do the following:
1. Create a build of a cvs
From: Roy T. Fielding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 10:06 PM
There have been no objections, so I would appreciate it if we could
get rid of the incubator unix group in favor of apcvs for everything
except the incubator-core repository:
Done.
I'll cleanup the
We should ask ourselves if we expect to provide a home for extended
Perl, C or whatever APIs, naming services for those languages, etc. If
the answer is yes, then fine, we can all agree and move forward.
my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services
could make up a
On 9/22/2003 1:27 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
+1. I don't think that we need have multiple people fufill all these
roles. If the sponsor/shepherd/mentor is going to be a member of the
incubator PMC (see 1 above), then they ought to be trusted to follow the
incubator guidlines (once they
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We should ask ourselves if we expect to provide a home for extended
Perl, C or whatever APIs, naming services for those languages, etc. If
the answer is yes, then fine, we can all agree and move forward.
my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services
Steve,
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. Entities (Board, Parent, Incubator PMC) should not assigned actional
responsibilities - only decision responsibility. Actional reposibility
should be assigned to roles that are represented by accountable
individuals. There
Ted,
If I were you, I think that I would subscribe myself to the Incubator PMC
mailing list. That way you can see how things are settling in (I would
expect that they could use a bit of time to consolidate all of the
discussion), and if they say that they're ready, find out whom is going to
take
Berin:
Have just read though your email and I feel that I have very strong
empathy with the position your raising - but all the same I'm going to
disagree with you! I'm confident that if we were in a cafe down in the
14e we would tie this up nicely in less that a couple of hours. But
that
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Small change in wording. If Ted stops doing his role as Shepherd,
then I would see it as the responsibility of the XML Project PMC
Chair to step in and find someone else.
Wooop - a compound correction to an otherwise perfect composition:
If Ted stops doing his
Please note that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list is suffering the same disease.
It looks to me that projects@ has both an owner and a moderator (although it
could use more moderators).
Your comment
(http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
he.orgmsgNo=41) was about a Reply-To header.
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
OK, based on everything I've read from this and a few of the
other threads on this list, which I've just caught up to (I
picked a bad weekend to attend a wedding that took me off email
;-), I am going to propose to the other XMLBeans folks that we
do the following:
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Steve,
Not actually sure we are disagreeing. Let me
just add some thoughts and see where we get to...
Zut ... Australia really is at the end of the earth relative to France!
(Zut translated into Australian is B* H***).
GRIN. Tell me about it. The time
if this relates to an actionable issue - could you be a touch more
specific as to the action.
Actually, at this point I think that discussion has converged, a consensus
appears to have emerged, and since Berin has taken a lead on coalescing this
material, I think it makes sense to give him (and
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't the wisest course of action in my view.
Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community of bureaucrats. As
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:44:05 -0400
(Subject: RE: technology sucks)
Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your comment
(http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]msgNo=41)
was about a Reply-To header.
Oh, yes. yes.
*** NOTE *** Lists without Reply-To Header would be sure to
Lists without Reply-To Header ...
If the PMC wants the list properties changed, perhaps because of requests
from the list users, they can submit a request to have the list
reconfigured.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe,
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't
On 9/22/2003 4:50 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Rodent of Unusual Size
what's the role of the incubator pmc in this? at the least, it's a set
of passionate asf people who are essentially in agreement about what
makes something a genuine 'apache'-style project, who review the
reports
52 matches
Mail list logo
