Re: Killing the incubator m2 repository

On 17/03/07, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But times change. Apparently now people think that since the Incubator PMC has binding votes on podling releases, then these things *are* indeed official releases, providing both the usual legal protections to PMC members who voted for it,

Re: Incentive for Graduation

On Friday 16 March 2007 19:46, Davanum Srinivas wrote: What are we going to do about projects that will show signs of life but will remain in incubator for a very long time. when do we kick them out? 3 years? 5 years? No community - no releases ?? Cheers Niclas

Re: Incentive for Graduation

Niclas, Here the scenario is a project with all committers from one employer and regular releases. -- dims On 3/17/07, Niclas Hedhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 16 March 2007 19:46, Davanum Srinivas wrote: What are we going to do about projects that will show signs of life but will

Re: [VOTE] Should we treat incubator releases differently to normal releases

On Mar 16, 2007, at 2:23 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: Two parts to the vote: ONE: Should Incubator tarballs go in the normal place (and thus mirrors). [ ] +1 [ ] -1 [X] think decision should be made together with infrastructure team TWO: Should there be an Incubator maven repository. [ ] +1

Re: Killing the incubator m2 repository

On 3/16/07, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But times change. Apparently now people think that since the Incubator PMC has binding votes on podling releases, then these things *are* indeed official releases, providing both the usual legal protections to PMC members who voted for it,

Re: Difference between Maven repository and dist directory

Let's be clear, the central repo can host apache incubating artifacts, it's not its business, it's an ASF business. Now, only the ASF can publish under org.apache groupId through the repos setup in the ASF boxes that are automatically setup But if John Doe decides to publish an incubator

Re: Killing the incubator m2 repository

On 3/16/07, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carlos Sanchez wrote: 1. central repo must be self contained, all artifacts in central repository must have dependencies already in central, only exception is if license doesn't allow redistribution but in that case the pom must be there

Some help with Lucene.Net release

Hi Folks, First, many thanks to all who helped review my previous attempt to get a vote for releasing Lucene.Net 2.0. I have addressed the issues highlighted and prepared a new package for re-Voting. However, before I issue another request for vote, I have two questions outstanding request: 1)

Re: Some help with Lucene.Net release

On 3/17/07, George Aroush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...Can someone please take a look at : http://people.apache.org/~aroush/Lucene.Net-2.0-004/ and tell me if the KEYS is right as well as if the *.asc files validate?... The KEYS file is in the correct format, I was able to import it with gpg

RE: Some help with Lucene.Net release

Thanks for the quick response Bertrand! I generated the MD5 and SHA file based on: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#md5 using the commands: $ gpg --print-md MD5 [fileName] [fileName].md5 and $ gpg --print-md SHA1 [fileName] [fileName].sha As for your comment about the ASC

Re: Some help with Lucene.Net release

On 3/17/07, George Aroush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I generated the MD5 and SHA file based on: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#md5 using the commands: $ gpg --print-md MD5 [fileName] [fileName].md5.. I'll let others comment as to whether this is a usually accepted

Re: [VOTE] Should we treat incubator releases differently to normal releases

fully clothed? :) hey this is cheating adding new options :) On 3/17/07, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 16, 2007, at 2:23 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: Two parts to the vote: ONE: Should Incubator tarballs go in the normal place (and thus mirrors). [ ] +1 [ ] -1 [X] think decision

Re: [VOTE] Should we treat incubator releases differently to normal releases

On 3/15/07, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two parts to the vote: ONE: Should Incubator tarballs go in the normal place (and thus mirrors). +1 TWO: Should there be an Incubator maven repository. -1 Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL

RE: Some help with Lucene.Net release

Thanks Bertrand! All: must the key be signed by someone other then me? If so, can someone from ASF do so? Thanks. -- George -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bertrand Delacretaz Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 2:29 PM To:

Re: Incentive for Graduation

[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 3/17/07, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Niclas, Here the scenario is a project with all committers from one employer and regular releases. Are you talking about Tuscany still? Not all the Tuscany committers are from the one employer. There's 25 committers

Re: Incentive for Graduation

Ant, No, question is not about tuscancy. It's a general question as the situation can arise in the future where someone is trying to game the system. thanks, dims On 3/17/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 3/17/07, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Niclas,

Re: Any potential ideas to start a new Project

On 3/17/07, ambi ambi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I am looking for some potential ideas to start a new project. Any suggestions? The question is too vague. Are you a committer? Is there any relationship between your new project and the Apache projects? Why do you want to start the new

Tuscany, was: Incentive for Graduation

Tuscany has issues though. When you look at active committers (at least one commit in the last 3 months) it is a different picture: 14 from IBM and 3 from elsewhere (83%). Worse, there are modules where no non-IBM committer has ever been active (e.g. Java/SDO, Java/DAS, C+ +/*). -- Jeremy