On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please add your reports at
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/November2008 Real Soon.
Buildr report added, sorry for the delay.
Assaf
-Bertrand
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 3:08 AM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Passed with +3 (binding votes were cast on the PPMC mailing list)
Could you please provide a vote summary? Who are those 3 people, etc.
Sorry
Passed with +3 (binding votes were cast on the PPMC mailing list)
Assaf
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Up for vote, the Buildr 1.3.2 release. The release vote passed within
the PPMC with +6 (+7 including non-binding votes) and no -1:
http://mail
Up for vote, the Buildr 1.3.2 release. The release vote passed within
the PPMC with +6 (+7 including non-binding votes) and no -1:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-buildr-dev/200810.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
We're voting on the source distributions available here:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Doug Cutting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jukka Zitting wrote:
[ ] +1 Yes, allow extra release distribution channels like the central
Maven repository
[ ] -1 No, keep the current policy
+1 All releases by ASF PMC's should be equal. If the Incubator PMC isn't
Passed with +3 and no -1.
Assaf
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Up for vote, the Buildr 1.3.2 release. The release vote passed within
the PPMC with +3 (+5 including non-binding votes) and no -1:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-buildr
the Incubator disclaimer text, maybe on the page which already has
the Apache License text.
Welcome/Notices, on page 7.
It's generated from the same source as the web site, so we only have
to edit one file to include all the proper notices.
Assaf
...ant
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Assaf
Up for vote, the Buildr 1.3.2 release. The release vote passed within
the PPMC with +3 (+5 including non-binding votes) and no -1:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-buildr-dev/200807.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
We're voting on the source distributions available here:
3 +1 votes here, one addition +1 PPMC on buildr-dev for a total of +4
to get this release out.
Assaf
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This release is primarily to solve the installation problem on Windows
due to unspecific dependency on RJB. Other changes
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 5:51 PM, Matthieu Riou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This release is primarily to solve the installation problem on Windows
This release is primarily to solve the installation problem on Windows
due to unspecific dependency on RJB. Other changes and solved issues
in this release are listed below.
The release vote passed within the PPMC with 3 +1:
Counting IPMC members who voted here and on buildr-dev, we have three +1 and
no -1.
Time to make that release.
Assaf
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Matthieu Riou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Assaf Arkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Up for vote, the much
Up for vote, the much-anticipated Buildr 1.3 release, the first official
Apache release of the Buildr project.
The release vote passed within the PPMC with 6 +1:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-buildr-dev/200804.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
We're voting to make a release based on
On 2/17/08, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But visibility of the content and process very much IS part of the Apache
Way.
Most of the use cases mentioned so far for git, including some where
people are using it on top of SVN with ASF projects, run counter to ASF
principles. It is
+1 (non binding)
Assaf
On 2/9/08, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've had an initial discussion, which attracted a number of messages
of encouragement, and identified no issues or concerns. Then we
proceeded onto a proposal, which attracted three excellent mentors.
Now it is time to
+1 (non binding)
Very exciting to see this happening at Apache.
Assaf
On 1/31/08, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The original source for this proposal can be found at
http://www.couchdbwiki.com/index.php?title=Apache_Incubator_Proposal
and a current snapshot is attached below. Once we
On 1/23/08, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that there are two discussions going on at the same time:
1. Whether it is cool for people to do this.
2. Whether we should try to stop people from doing this.
I am pretty sure that we all agree that it is not cool
On 1/22/08, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache. And the
reasoning that its too much effort to rename
18 matches
Mail list logo
