On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
...The Apache Members are coming in as the PMC. This is a much more
serious commitment than being a Mentor. The pTLP is not an
IPMC
On Jan 26, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
Hi!
after making sure that there's still an Incubator
to be managed for the next 6-12 months, I'd like
to open up a discussion thread on soliciting
nominations for the next IPMC Chair.
Feel free to self-nominate or
Dear Incubator,
(if this isn’t the right list to ask this, please direct be to the correct
place).
The CouchDB community was approached by the lead developer of
https://github.com/dscape/nano to have the project become apart of Apache
CouchDB. The community has voiced some interest in
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
Things to keep in mind while thinking about nominating
yourself or others:
1. This is a 6-12 months commitment that, based on my
personal experience, would require you to allocate 7-10
hours per week.
+1 for Ted Dunning.
Ted has passion for the Incubator's mission. He is an excellent consensus
builder, with the right mix of patience and advocacy. He can get the job done
while sending judicious amounts of email, which is important in keeping
traffic on general@incubator under control. He is
It's an *option* not the only route. Working for some but not others is just
fine.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 11:23 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Chris Mattmann; Jim Jagielski
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
I
+1 [sadly]
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 02:13PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
This is a vote on recommending a retirement option
for the NPanday poddling.
It comes on the hills of the general consensus of
the NPanday community and its mentors that
retirement is the only viable path at this point:
On Jan 26, 2015, at 10:57 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com
wrote:
Things to keep in mind while thinking about nominating
yourself or others:
1. This is a 6-12 months commitment that, based on my
+1; this is a pragmatic proposal. -C
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
Hi!
I think it would be fair to say that in the
past month or so we've had a healthy amount
of discussion around where to go next with
IPMC/Incubator/Metors reform. A diverse
set
TL;DR I think this is a good idea.
I thought long and hard about this during the weekend and I’ve changed my mind
about this; I’ll spare you my handwringing thought processes. Some things that
I personally would like to see:
- do away w/ the pTLP name, just make it a regular TLP
- ComDev
Hi!
after making sure that there's still an Incubator
to be managed for the next 6-12 months, I'd like
to open up a discussion thread on soliciting
nominations for the next IPMC Chair.
Feel free to self-nominate or nominate folks who
you know. Provide a summary of your 'program'
or not. At this
Yes, formal votes for all decisions has been my *universal* experience on
all projects I have participated in at Apache. It's like there are two (or
more) different foundations, culturally. Thanks for the consideration.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
On
One option would be to get the company involved to donate the trademark,
if you check with trademarks@a.o then I am pretty sure that has happened
in the past and they can likely guide you on procedures for this
Your wording implies that perhaps this isn't an option in this particular
podlings
Hello
The Apache NiFi (incubating) team is pleased to be calling this vote for
the source release of Apache
NiFi 0.0.1-incubating.
With six binding (in the ppmc sense) +1 votes and no dissenting votes the
PPMC has approved the vote for the release in this thread:
http://s.apache.org/nifi-rc3
I think your assumption is fairly reasonable. The iithmus test would be;
What if any contributions outside the sign-off ones, turn out to be not
clean? Is it reasonable to remove such patch and do a rewrite of that
section? If the answer is yes, we can either re-write or remove that
without too
15 matches
Mail list logo
