)
0 +0 votes
0 -1 votes
IPMC:
+1 Alan Cabrera
+1 Benson Margulies
Committer/PPMC:
+1 Adam Fuchs
+1 David Medinets
+1 Chris Waring
+1 Eric Newton
+1 John Vines
+1 Keith Turner
Community:
+1 Michael Van Geertruy
- Original Message -
From: Billie J Rinaldi billie.j.rina
-1 here.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
strictly -1 for forcing a name change on graduation.
That would just cause additional overhead without any benefit.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com
To:
I don't think it's a good question. I think that it is typical of the
sort of hypothetical question which leads to heaps of scorn from Sam.
I can imagine circumstances where it would make some sense, and some
cases where it would be evidence of a serious problem in a TLP.
The Foundation is
+1
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Niall
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote:
This is a call for vote to graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator.
Sqoop entered Incubator in June of 2011. Since
+1
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Dan Haywood
d...@haywood-associates.co.uk wrote:
Isis is in the process of voting on 0.2.0-incubating (RC3).
The thread below has the details, along with current votes cast.
We still need one more +1 from a member before we can release.
I'd like to
+1
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
The Jena PPMC has voted to release
Apache Jena TDB 0.9.0-incubating
and we would now be grateful if members of IPMC would review and vote for
this release.
== Overview
This will be the second incubator release for
!
Cheers,
Chris
P.S. Here's my +1. Thanks buddy.
On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
I am happy to step out of the way for Jukka. He was clever enough to
stay out of the email s*** storm, and that alone, in my mind, renders
him most qualified.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:02
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 (binding)
+1 (binding)
From my perspective, Chris's proposal and Benson's vote above
I am happy to step out of the way for Jukka. He was clever enough to
stay out of the email s*** storm, and that alone, in my mind, renders
him most qualified.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
I already mentioned that I would have nominated you, and
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
+1 (binding)
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2012 2:04 PM
Subject: Re:
+1
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Martijn Dashorst
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
+1, retire (I don't have a better opinion to throw at the problem than
the owning community :)
Martijn
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
As discussed
Bill characterized this situation as writing a proposal to the board
to to blow up and replace the incubator, and that has colored my
writing. Bill has also been the most vehement opponent of one of the
possible evolutionary strategies: to elect people to the PMC on the
strength (only) of their
Right now they are on very polar ends of the whole
discussion, which suggests neither until the incubator and board choose
a path forward.
I don't find the formulation 'polar opposites' helpful, let alone
prior remarks about whether the two of us can agree about something.
It's not up to us
I've added http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/AlternativeIncubatorAnalysis
to the wiki, offering a more or less concrete alternative that is more
evolutionary and less revolutionary. Get out your darts, and feel free
to edit.
-
To
document, not just from you, and b) try
to remove as many names as possible. It also might be helpful if the
proposal was worded as if Chris' didn't exist. Just document what the
process would be and how it solves the problems we have now.
Ralph
On Feb 4, 2012, at 5:48 AM, Benson Margulies
On Feb 4, 2012, at 5:48 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
I've added http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/AlternativeIncubatorAnalysis
to the wiki, offering a more or less concrete alternative that is more
evolutionary and less revolutionary. Get out your darts, and feel free
to edit
Ralph, I'm inclined to hair up the chart to distinguish 'podlings'
from 'probationary projects'. Otherwise, fine. I'll do that.
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
I see that Ralph already removed
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Scott Wilson wrote:
On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote:
A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep
breath and allow room to digest and contemplate
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Ralph, I'm inclined to hair up the chart to distinguish 'podlings'
from 'probationary projects'. Otherwise, fine. I'll do that.
I see from your latest updates
It seems to me that the proposed new scheme will take quite a bit of
setting up. There is some writing to do. More to the point, if I were
the board, I would want to pilot the new scheme for some time before
tearing down the existing incubator. All of this looks to me like more
than 2 months.
A
At this point I am going to frankly campaign for myself.
I am willing to be the chair of the incubator as we know it, and
strive to incrementally improve it. I have no objection to that
process including a deliberate consideration of Chris' proposal for a
radical restructuring. Given some time,
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 3 February 2012 23:17, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
One way to make the load lighter is to try to make one decision at a
time.
+1
Entirely selfishly, I suggest looking at the chair election
I'm going to treat this like any other nomination process and provide
a brief statement.
Volunteeritis: I'm active on the CXF and Maven PMCs, and I am a bit of
an uncle at Mahout and WS, and I've agreed to stick around as a PMC
member on EmpireDB in transition from podling to TLP. My mentor
I have a lateral thought. Assuming for the moment that Chris has
accepted or will accept a nomination, why not recommend *both* of us
to the board as co-chairs? The IPMC is special. New members pop up all
the time and need to be fed to the board; projects need karmic
assistance, etc. Having two
to make it my business to find out the rules promptly.
As for what I think, I've written it.
From: Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2012 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: Time to vote the chair?
I have
I apologize if my choice of words here engendered a belief that I was
trying to hold mentors to a new standard.
The IPMC has been discussing the problem of mentors who don't do their
job. I'm trying to approach this problem from the front end, instead
of waiting for it to be a problem later on.
There has been a lot of heated email sent on the incubator lists in
the last few months. It was my mistake not to realize that my email
asking about mentor commitment and experience would be read in the
light of that context.
I don't claim to know why the mentor-less podlings lost their mentors,
The word 'justification' occurred nowhere in my email. Nonetheless, I
already apologized for my poor choice of tone. I could see someone
reading my query as calling for a 'resume', but I prefer to think of
it as an 'introduction.'
I will continue to ask proposed podlings to draw a picture of
At the risk of seeming trite, +1, but ...
This lengthy proposal shifts the supervision responsibility of
podlings from an big IPMC to a set of mentors approved by the board at
the advice of a small iPMC. In other words, a project is born when
three? foundation members, or others deemed
don't we also have jukka?
On Feb 1, 2012, at 6:17 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
We have already 2 good nominations for the IPMC chair role, Noel and Benson.
I would like add a new name and nominate Chris Mattman as the IPMC
chair. He does care deeply on the incubator and
Dear Proposed Syncope mentors:
Please post messages on this thread indicating your prior experience
as mentors, if any, and your willing to remain in place as active
mentors for at least a year.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Jan 29, 2012, at 11:24 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 1/29/2012 12:11 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I intend to nominate Noel J. Bergman but would like to see the community
come to a consensus about the
I'd like to nominate Noel to continue as chair. Noel hasn't resigned,
and we don't have a consensus on rotation. So I think any vote we hold
to recommend a chair to the board should include the option of his
sticking in place unless he chooses to remove himself from the
running.
+1
But shouldn't we agree on a rotationi/reelection before we do the nominations?
Christian, I hate to repeat myself, but could I direct your attention
to my recent message? If you think that a rotation policy should come
first, start a thread proposing a rotation policy, and we can all
leave
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Jan 29, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
FTR: as should be clear from my above response, I disagree with the topic of
this discussion thread. This should be about Regular (re)election of the PMC
Chair.
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
When did you resign?
Noel hasn't, as far as I have been able to track the email, formally
resigned. He sent email stating that he was willing to step aside if
the community wanted to elect someone else. Someone could
+1
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 January 2012 06:20, Prescott Nasser geobmx...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Lucene.Net 2.9.4g is ready for release.
This is very similar to our release at the end of November, however we have
used
generics where
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
My opinion: It's one thing to try to involve yourself in the fortunes
of one or two projects in addition to your own, and be willing to
provide general opinions, and be willing to contribute content to the
incubator's
Kosin jko...@apache.org
Jörn Kottmann jo...@apache.org
Aliaksandr Autayeu auta...@apache.org
Boris Galitsky bgalit...@apache.org
Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org
Benson Margulies bimargul...@apache.org
Isabel Drost exam...@apache.org
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Jörn
Don,
I think that place where you, Leo, and Sam meet up is in the
identification and clarification of *minimal* legal and procedural
requirements.
Sam's repeated over and over that he is, in effect, trying to
establish the minimal level of oversight and supervision of podlings
(and that the
I would appreciate it if the participants in this discussion would be
really clear about their views about several different podling
profiles.
a: A reasonably diverse group of 5-7 people start a podling. A year
later, they've made a release or two, but no one new has turned up.
Mentors attest to
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Michael Stroucken m...@cmu.edu wrote:
Joe Schaefer wrote:
Let's stop discussing this issue in the abstract then and take
a look at the current set of reports. Of the ones with signatures
of mentors, I see very little to gripe about- the topics and subjects
And here we return to a thread of some weeks ago. One chair can't
review all those reports and push the bounce buttons. Some other
people have to step up to help.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 3:48 PM, ant elder
one way or the
other soon.
Regards,
Stuart
On 11 Jan 2012, at 23:05, ant elder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
And here we return to a thread of some
elder wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
And here we return to a thread of some weeks ago. One chair can't
review all those reports and push the bounce buttons. Some
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...Ignore the proposal. It is out of date, since the podling has already
started. The Bloodhound and Trac communities already have a new
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:49 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
It is not helpful to have a number of directors contradicting each
other on general@, never coming to consensus. In fact, its
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:28 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:55 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
is that my topic needs to go take
a rest until the topic of non-responsible mentors is under control.
Upayavira
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012, at 08:10 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sam,
I started this separate thread because I
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Alan D.Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 3:47 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Maven coordinate for incubating podlings
It's my
This has been the subject of prior conversations, but I'm opening a
thread in some hope of reaching a definitive resolution.
Some of our non-graduating podlings have a common problem. They look
good in all ways except growth. This inhibits graduation from 2.5
standpoints:
1) they are dubiously
If the Incubator is not sure that a podling is small but healthy, then
would the board be in a better position to make that judgement after
graduation?
In the case at hand (Isis), I'd propose that the IPMC could assert
that they are healthy -- with an asterix. Never having seen them
try to get at bit more folks interrested.
But they have 3, 4 frequent committers which do a very good job. And the team
has really good community skills!
Thus I'm not yet particularly worried.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sam,
Rather than argue about the existence and interpretation of messages
about squashing stale podlings, how about this adjustment to my
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Jan 3, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
...I'm saying that the *ASF* should avoid judging. We allow competition
among
[ ] Forks are accepted without judgement [Greg] [1]
[ ] [something more nuanced here]
[X ] Hostile forks are never acceptable [Roy] [2]
I don't understand the purpose of a vote here. Roy has stated rather
firmly that [2] is settled foundation policy. So, if someone wants to
reopen that
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-1?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13177402#comment-13177402
]
Benson Margulies commented on PODLINGNAMESEARCH-1
+1
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
*bump*. We have 2 +1s from mentors already, so at a minimum we need
just one more binding vote to do this release. Anyone have time to do
the review?
thanks!
Leo
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Andy Seaborne
Hey IPMC: We seem to have lost a mentor to the holidays or something.
These folks have worked very hard (and been through 10 candidates) to
get to this point. Could some other IPMC member please have a look at,
if appropriate, add the missing -1?
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:22 PM, John Vines
+
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Eric Newton eric.new...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the first incubator release for Apache Accumulo, with the artifacts
versioned as 1.3.5-incubating.
VOTE:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accumulo-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00939.html
RESULT:
+1 binding
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Eric Newton eric.new...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the first incubator release for Apache Accumulo, with the artifacts
versioned as 1.3.5-incubating.
VOTE:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accumulo-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00939.html
RESULT:
Suggestion:
There are cases where the 'official word' is a full-ASF document which
we don't lightly edit. Yet, we see some evidence that podlings have
trouble reaching the right interpretation.
We don't want to duplicate, but we could supplement.
Specific proposal: I'm willing to try to write a
Christian,
Your proposals read to me as an elaboration and extension of some of
the things I wrote. I think that Joe S's reaction to me, insofar as I
understand it, makes some sense.
Let's see if we can find a small group of members of the IPMC who are,
in fact, willing to take seriously the
If we can build such a group, it would be the logical nucleus of a
reboot. If not, well, we've got other problems.
Care to give some specifics?
Robert
Robert,
Between my posts at the top of this thread, and all the many messages
on Joe's (I think) thread about the board wanting to delegate
One piece of advice I've been kicking myself for not offering more
aggressively is this: ask for review before you bother to put up a
candidate for a vote. It's a lot less work.
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at
I think I've been leading a sheltered existence. In the TLPs of which
I play a part, over the 5 years or so that I've been around, I've
never seen a release proceed past a -1. Every single time, a -1 has
led to recutting the release.
In some ways, I'd expect the incubator to be more conservative
I guess I sent one email too many here. On the other thread, I was
perfectly happy to join the nacent consensus that the willing should
step up and supervise, as opposed to any sort of structural change.
I'm back there now. And, anyway, all if this is a hijack. This thread
started as 'how can we
I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
based on recent traffic here. Unfortunately, that conversation left me
with a giant headache and no clear idea.
The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not?
Well, fine, I am happy to +1.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Nov 25, 2011, at 8:32 AM, ant elder wrote:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about
/%3CCAGD0tqF78OuHN6AjLLXb950VfbGm3MABvV3txruHUS0b6HCu8Q%
40mail.gmail.com%3E
The vote received 6 PPMC approvals, of which 3 were also IPMC members
(Benson Margulies, Martijn Dashorst and Thomas Fox).
I would like to ask the IPMC to approve the graduation.
[ ] +1 - I approve of the Empire-db graduation
I will offer a theory in response to Hoss.
The incubator has a particular and critical role in the success of the
Foundations. Projects that start well are likelier to continue well.
From this, you might argue along with Hoss that the Board, burned once
by problems with delegated supervision,
When the hot air manufacturers start ragging on us, one of the usual
tags that they paint is 'rules' and 'bureaucracy'. If you read
general@, you will see a fairly regular occurrence that feeds this
perception.
Someone poses a question about NOTICE files, or IP, or release structure.
If they are
I am +1 to Joe's formulation of short-term action items. I'd like to
graduate one or two of my personal ducklings before I sign up to start
acting as a wandering nuncio to others.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 22 November 2011 10:20, Bertrand
I feel very lucky that my podlings have gotten this sort of thing
right pretty much without me. I've been thinking that I should, in
future, grab their attention and remind them of some things early and
often.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
The
The last time I was in this neighborhood, I was told (by no less than
our esteemed chairman) that the Champion's role was purely to play
Virgil on a podling's initial tour of the Foundation and the
Incubator. Once the podling was accepted, the Champion evaporated.
If I add Bertrand and
Speaking wearing a hat:
There is no requirement for monolithic releases. The project can
choose whatever units it likes to release, so long as each one of them
is fully buildable from the materials voted on in the release. If they
want to hold one vote on 400 of them, well, it casts some doubt on
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 12:11 PM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
Gosh. Well perhaps its me that needs to go back to school then. But i
find this most unexpected. The ASF FAQ on what is a release says All
releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
changes to the
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Well its a little confusing to expect anyone other than a mentor
to shepherd a project- the corresponding shepherd at the TLP level
is a board member responsible for interfacing between the board
and the project on any
Sam,
Do you see any validity in my theory that the ipmc is so large and
diffuse as to be directionless?
--benson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sam,
Do you see any validity in my theory that the ipmc is so large and
diffuse as to be directionless?
I don't see that as a necessary
I see what I did wrong.
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 9:36 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 November 2011 00:42, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul
Sebb,
I think we need a discussion on general@ about source.
I personally serve as release manager for about 3 Apache Maven plugins
per month.
None of them have a 'source release' in the sense you describe.
There's a maven source jar artifact, and that's it.
I'm happy to work with the Accumulo
Sebb,
I was wrong.
--benson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
, and I was wrong.
Everyone else feel free to join in.
--benson
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Benson Margulies
bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Sebb,
I think we need a discussion on general@ about source.
I personally serve as release manager for about 3 Apache Maven plugins
per month
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote:
Again, we had this discussion before namely, when the actual release
vote happened. I'm still confused why we have to go through this
again. You should be able to build all of the components by using the
I have been working to get Empire-DB to graduate, and I expect to have
a vote in front of general@ quite soon.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:17 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 November 2011 20:57, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Christian Grobmeier
While I agree that it's important to confront the current inventory, I
think that the situation at hand is as much a matter of what goes into
the incubator as what comes out.
In my limited experience, size and growth are a big barrier to
graduation. If a project is chugging along exhibiting good
That page is very misleading, and there was a long discussion of this
topic elsewhere.
Look at the example just above the requirement:
The Apache Xerces XML parsing library is easily configurable and
compliant with current standards
Yes, in some sense, Xerces is an adjective there, but really
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 November 2011 02:12, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
That page is very misleading, and there was a long discussion of this
topic elsewhere.
Look at the example just above the requirement:
The Apache Xerces XML
+1 (binding)
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:
Coming back to this.
It unfortunately seems that there's no (even optimistic) expectation
that Olio will graduate.
So, voting:
[ ] +1
[ ] -1, no because...
Hen
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:27 PM,
I agree with sebb about UIMA and notices. Sorry not to have been
paying attention when this came up before.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:45 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 November 2011 14:48, Jörn Kottmann kottm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/7/11 3:29 PM, sebb wrote:
On 7 November 2011 09:30,
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:50 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 10/30/2011 8:05 PM, David Crossley wrote:
Benson Margulies wrote:
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Thinking out load: perhaps just promote the project into a TLP, while
having a few IPMC members volunteer to become PMC
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Rainer Döbele doeb...@esteam.de wrote:
...Certainly there is no way for us to compete
The current RAT situation leads me to suggest that we graduate Empire.
As a mentor, I'd characterize Empire-Db as a project that was long ago
ready, save for the same issue as RAT: a small group that grows very,
very, slowly.
They respond on their email, they apply Apache process, they make
Prospective podlings are well-advised to consider that if things don't work
out, a project which might have been perfectly viable elsewhere for years to
come will have to deal with both the disruption of a name change and the
stigma of having a big red termination stamp applied by the
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Two quick comments, haven't read the context:
Marvin Humphrey wrote on Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 10:26:57 -0700:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:55:01PM +0100, Jukka Zitting wrote:
To me this suggests that our current three
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Benson Margulies wrote on Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 15:33:25 -0400:
Could the incubator, or a clone of the incubator, serve as a permanent
home for small projects? Essentially, this amounts to removing all the
'incubator
The startup of accumulo has been, from my point of view, strangely
painful for mailing list moderation. I'd like to learn something from
this for the next time around.
Here's what I think is the relevant history:
1) The initial committers all subscribe to the lists with their
favorite email
Not a link as such, just use:
Reply - accept
Reply All - accept and allow
Sebb,
I see what you're referring to in
http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#mail-moderate, and now I see
it hiding in the cc where gmail wasn't making it obvious.
Sorry for the stupidity.
BTW, is apmail still
Apologies to all, but my memory is leaky and my google skills faulty.
I've got a podling's worth of accounts to create. Do I use the
'member' link on the new submission form for this purpose?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
401 - 500 of 665 matches
Mail list logo
