On 2/3/08, Ahmad Khalifa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neng Geng Huang wrote:
The key of i18n4data is to i18n user's data, not interface message.
For example, if you are developing an e-shop web site to support two
languages (English and French), you might have a table to store your
goods
Leo
I am a mentor with Tuscany. I'm not concerned about where Tuscany is
now... I think its growing well and is progressing towards graduation.
However, Tuscany did have a significant fork a while back and this new
proposal has completely confused me: basically its a proposal for part
of what's
Neng Geng Huang wrote:
I reviewd commons-i18n. It is a different implementatoin with
different purpose.
I could not find any source at this address [1]
Could you show me the source, I think I don't get exactly what your
i18n4data does.
I am new here, but I think it would be better to merge
On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache-
style open source
Hi, Ahmad,
I didn't put the source in CVS, I just put the source, bin, and demo files
in the download area[1]. You may visit that page and click download to
download page.
[1] https://sourceforge.net/projects/i18n4data
Thank you for your interest in it. Your comments is valuable to me.
Paul,
The fork on Tuscany was not instigated by BEA. Of the three committers
who decided to leave Tuscany, due to technical differences and
otherwise, only Jim Marino was employed by BEA. Myself and Jeremy
Boynes were independent committers, though, Jeremy was employed by IBM
and leading the
On Feb 3, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Paul,
The fork on Tuscany was not instigated by BEA. Of the three committers
who decided to leave Tuscany, due to technical differences and
otherwise, only Jim Marino was employed by BEA. Myself and Jeremy
Boynes were independent
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
1) http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#template-affiliations
Replace the last paragraph Only the affiliations...bootstrap has been
completed with this:
***
As a general rule, podling committers and mentors are requested to
disclose their company
On Jan 13, 2008 10:47 PM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
who's supposed to add a new podling to the reporting schedule and when
does this need to be done?
Preferably by the Mentors doing the project setup.
added a step to
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Disclosure... I work for IBM.
So do I.
IBM'ers participate on projects as individuals and it's the actions of
individuals that should be judged.
I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about
open source participation. It is either on private time, such
On Jan 15, 2008 3:00 AM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The proposal should contain the rest of the information that needs
to be collected before the mailing lists can be set up. All mailing
lists for a project SHOULD use the project's host as the domain. In
particular, the
On Jan 16, 2008 11:17 PM, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The wording in the Policy was deliberately non-procedural, as the
Incubator PMC decided that policy belongs in the policy document and
process belongs elsewhere. So as far as I'm concerned, this discussion
is not supposed to
Meeraj, Jeremy
Please read my note again. At no point did I say or imply that BEA led
anything. The only thing I said about BEA was:
the two companies who couldn't agree to do it together in Tuscany.
Is there anything incorrect about that statement? I'm willing to be
corrected if I'm wrong.
following http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#Set+Up+Repository
doesn't work for me. i also tried:
$ svn mkdir https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rat
svn: MKCOL of
'/repos/asf/!svn/wrk/a5890c71-85da-4dc7-93ba-ec3a93543b70/incubator/rat':
405 Method Not Allowed
...Craig has a good point - maybe that 'pruning' process, to the
extent it's appropriate, should happen before they start the actual
graduation process?
The question is how, and it's something no established project has
ever figured out, nevermind our podlings :)...
Hence the
David Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Leo already gave a decent explanation.
Basically, it comes down to two aspects:
1) infrastructure support
2) cultural bias
There's no No git rule that I know
Jukka Zitting [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Incubator PMC,
Please vote on accepting the PDFBox project for incubation. The full
PDFBox proposal is available at the end of this message and as a wiki
page at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PDFBoxProposal. We ask the
Incubator PMC to sponsor the
Tee hee. You can't create a directory that already exists!
I set that up for you two weeks ago, and added your initial committers
too.
Regards, Upayavira
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 17:50 +, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
following http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#Set+Up+Repository
On Feb 3, 2008 6:32 PM, Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tee hee. You can't create a directory that already exists!
I set that up for you two weeks ago, and added your initial committers
too.
cheers :-)
could you check that
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#Set+Up+Repository
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008 7:36 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...Craig has a good point - maybe that 'pruning' process, to the
extent it's appropriate, should happen before they start the actual
graduation process?
The question is how, and it's something
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 19:23 +, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
should the IPMC/Mentors have karma for setting up issue tracking for a
new podling or is the infrastructure team?
I'd say it is the infrastructure team that gives karma for both Jira and
Confluence. Anyone who has the karma can
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAT
(i'm sure that anyone whose podling has been subjected to RAT must
have plenty of gripes or requests for improvements so now you're
chance to criticise RAT for a change)
- robert
-
To
On Feb 3, 2008 7:53 PM, Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 18:49 +, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008 6:32 PM, Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tee hee. You can't create a directory that already exists!
I set that up for you two weeks ago, and
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 18:49 +, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008 6:32 PM, Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tee hee. You can't create a directory that already exists!
I set that up for you two weeks ago, and added your initial committers
too.
cheers :-)
could you
On Jan 31, 2008 7:20 PM, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for general feedback about the group's
perception of incubated projects and the number of
roles that may be assumed by a foundation member in
one. Can I view RAT as an example
i knew that this would come up sooner or
On Feb 3, 2008 7:47 PM, Filip at Apache [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008 7:36 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...Craig has a good point - maybe that 'pruning' process, to the
extent it's appropriate, should happen before they start the
Thanks Robert, I filed a 'wish' for RAT that I've been wanting for a long
time but never expressed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAT-1
Alex
On Feb 3, 2008 2:56 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAT
(i'm sure that anyone
On Feb 1, 2008 6:00 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Matt,
I don't see a conflict for incubating projects when members assume
multiple roles, including Champion, Mentor, and Committer. If a Champion
is not a Mentor or Committer, then it's pure
On Jan 31, 2008 8:27 PM, Yoav Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 2:36 PM, Jukka Zitting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 9:20 PM, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for general feedback about the group's
perception of incubated projects and the number
ant elder wrote:
The error is the use of PPMC. It should say that only PMC member votes
are binding.
Now I'm confused. If it says only PMC member votes are binding does that
mean Incubator PMC?
Yes. The PPMC has no legal standing, and is an Incubator artifact. We want
them to vote, but
It is that time again, i.e., the beginning of a new month. Time to start
preparing reports for the Board.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But it is not individuals that propose this particular project, as I
understand it: it is IBM and BEA. And it was IBM that, in my view,
dumped the JSR 168 RI and then fled - not any individuals as such.
And IBM is also a significant force behind Tuscany, and have definitely not
fled. They
kelvin goodson wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal
As Paul and Mattieu asked, since SDO is quite closely aligned with SCA, is
there any point or interest in working with, or joining, Tuscany?
--- Noel
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
The error is the use of PPMC. It should say that only PMC member
votes are binding.
But somehow I like the fact that in most cases the vote is much wider
- and I think that this helps foster a community responsiblity.
Yes. But that's no different from
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
Meeraj, Jeremy
Please read my note again. At no point did I say or imply that BEA led
anything. The only thing I said about BEA was:
the two companies who couldn't agree to do it together in Tuscany.
Is there anything
On Feb 3, 2008 9:11 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 3, 2008 7:47 PM, Filip at Apache [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...Make it part of the graduation for the contributors in the podling to
decide if they want to continue or not. the folks who have made the
podling
36 matches
Mail list logo
