Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi all, Indeed, I now have greater clarity on the initial contributors list thanks to meeting John Ament this afternoon. The initial contributors list is somehow a magic list. Anyone on the list will, once the proposal has been voted on and accepted, automatically be contributors to the Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I spoke with Geertjan this afternoon. We both happened to be at the same popular java conference in San Francisco. I did give him some advice on the current initial contributors list. Basically two notes: - Add new members based on merit, not because prior to joining they are interested. The

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

On 2016-09-21 18:28, apache wrote: I remain committed to building and sharing open-source software for social web data interoperability. Participating in the incubator process has taught me a lot, and I would like the keep the project operating at Apache, but as Ate points out the community

Fwd: [VOTE] Apache BatchEE 0.4-incubating

Hi general@! FYI the BatchEE incubation project is votiing on batchee 0.4-incubating Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Wordpress Blog | Github

Re: [discuss] Move podling rosters to LDAP

Does means podlings will also need to define both a $podling and $podling-pmc group? Many podlings don't have a clear distinction - at least not in listings. Perhaps they should.. On 22 Sep 2016 3:17 a.m., "Sam Ruby" wrote: > cc += gstein > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at

Re: [VOTE] Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator

+1 Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:57 AM, Tom White wrote: > > +1 > > Tom > >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Doug Cutting wrote: >> Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a vote on >> accepting Spot into the Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I'm very convinced :-) I think the Netbeans proposal is ready for a [VOTE]! On 22 September 2016 at 13:57, Wade Chandler wrote: > >> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru wrote: >> >> Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: >>> On Thu,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi, On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Wade Chandler wrote: > ...I recently contributed some things for Groovy support, and intend to work > quite a bit on those features... Anyone who works "quite a bit" on something that adds value to the project and interacts in a

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik >> wrote: >> >>> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik > wrote: > >> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >> criteria >> to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? > > Projects

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: >...there hasn't even been a vote on the proposal at this stage. :-) Correct ;-) FWIW I've seen an internal draft of Daniel Gruno's infrastructure cost analysis so that's progressing nicely, we should

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > > I think Netbeans has the balance somewhat right - but I would hope > there would be more engagement on their existing lists to more openly > invite anyone who wants to join; or at least make it clear that the > whole of the community

Re: [VOTE] Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) St.Ack On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Doug Cutting wrote: > Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a vote on > accepting Spot into the Apache Incubator. > > [] +1 Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator > [] +0 Abstain. > [] -1 Do not accept Spot

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Agree - but the initial committer list is also an opportunity to show you really mean open development, and that it's not just business as usual with Friends & Family on the list. One of the freedoms a project gains from moving to ASF is (somewhat) relief from institutional political

RE: [VOTE] Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding). Thanks! Regards, Kai -Original Message- From: Tom White [mailto:tom.e.wh...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 3:57 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator +1 Tom On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Doug

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Wade, On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler wrote: > ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the initial list, I > understand, think it is fine, and agree that being added once we get into > the actual incubation phase makes sense... Thanks!

Re: [VOTE] Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator

+1 Tom On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Doug Cutting wrote: > Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a vote on > accepting Spot into the Apache Incubator. > > [] +1 Accept Spot into the Apache Incubator > [] +0 Abstain. > [] -1 Do not accept Spot into the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sep 21, 2016 4:15 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg > wrote: > > ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that they > > are eager to engage with the