Please vote to change Incubator Policy to remove escalate as a
policy term meaning guaduate:
[+1] apply the patch
[-1] don't apply the patch
Here's my +1
+1
Craig
Begin forwarded message:
From: Craig Russell (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: February 14, 2007 5:30:05 PM PST
To:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-53
Thanks,
Craig
Craig Russell
456 Chesley Avenue
Mountain View, CA 94040-4409
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
I'm working on a patch for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/
INCUBATOR-54.
Before proposing a change to the web site, I'd like to have an email
review the PPMC's role and responsibilities.
Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC)
While the Incubator Project Management Committee
On Feb 11, 2007, at 9:27 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
According to the process defined in
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/
Incubation_Policy.html#Exiting+the+Incubator
the Incubator needs to vote first and nod to the accepting PMC
that the project is
Hi Noel,
On Feb 8, 2007, at 9:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Craig Russell asked:
Henri gave definitions for two of the three. Examples of
escalation would
be raising an issue to the Incubator PMC or the ASF Board if you are
having problems that can't be resolved by not going that route.
Hi,
I've seen all three of these terms used in the incubator web site. Is
there an official term for the process of removing a podling from the
incubator to its proper place in Apache? Do we want to standardize
the terminology?
If so, I'll volunteer to write JIRA issues to make the
I'd like to see some clarification on the role of the PPMC and the
process of managing the PPMC membership. I've looked for guidance in
the web pages and it's not clear to me what to do to vote in a new
PPMC member, and then what to do.
For example, in Incubation_Policy.html, there is no
Hi Henri,
On Feb 8, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On 2/8/07, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've seen all three of these terms used in the incubator web site.
Is there
an official term for the process of removing a podling from the
incubator to
its proper place
+1
Craig
On Feb 6, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Dave wrote:
OK, let's try this again.
The Roller community believes that Roller is ready for graduation, as
evidenced by this vote:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-roller-dev/
200702.mbox/browser
We would like to initiate a vote to
On Dec 27, 2006, at 10:28 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
phoenix.apache.org?\
Good one.
Craig
Yoav Shapira wrote:
Hi,
On 12/24/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually ... what if we were to establish an area under incubator/,
which we
need anyway for podlings that get
Hi Tim,
It's great that you're interested in Apache, and there are lots of
ways you can participate.
Sadly, the lucene4c project never quite got off the ground, and was
closed for lack of activity in October 2006. You can find this from
their incubator status page
+1 (non-binding)
I think it's great that Apache will adopt this great technology...
Craig
On Dec 20, 2006, at 7:46 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
It is with great relief and hope that I propose that the Apache
Incubator PMC vote to incubate a new podling, to be known as
River. You may be
simple
mechanism so that folks can tell which internal review version you are
talking about. We just choose to do that by uploading each rebuild of
the same artifact to a new directory.
On 11/21/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, I just don't like that changes to the bits based
Hi Marc,
On Nov 27, 2006, at 6:38 PM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
Robert-
-- minor issues (fine by me to fix in trunk) --
the 'Exceptions as follows' section in LICENSE.txt is missing serp. i
think, just a typo since the LICENSE is included with reference.
serp is listed at
Sorry, I just don't like that changes to the bits based on an
internal review should change the name of the release.
Craig
On Nov 21, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
To avoid those issue ActiveMQ tends to do a build of say ActiveMQ
4.1.0 and we drop it in
a directory called
Hi Upayavira,
On Nov 21, 2006, at 3:35 PM, Upayavira wrote:
Patrick Linskey wrote:
...snipped...
However, I *would* like clear guidance about what to do. Is this
going
to cause problems with incubator approval of the 0.9.6 vote that's
currently running on the OpenJPA mailing list?
In the
Hi Jason,
On Nov 15, 2006, at 10:55 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 15 Nov 06, at 8:34 PM 15 Nov 06, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hate to quibble, but incubating is a gerund used as an adjective. ;-)
I also think of alpha and beta as adjectives also, as in the
alpha version, alpha being
On Nov 15, 2006, at 11:01 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
Hi,
since all committers at Apache are on the committers email list, all
pmcs on pmc list,... , why not adding all committers on an incubation
project to the general @ incubator list ?
Would make sense to me, since most of those
From my experience on the incubator list, this is probably the most
complete critique that we will get. So I think we're done once Robert
is happy.
Craig
On Nov 16, 2006, at 2:16 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone else have any showstopping concerns? It'd be good to know
about
Hi Robert,
On Nov 16, 2006, at 12:14 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 11/16/06, Marc Prud'hommeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OpenJPA incubator community voted on and has approved a proposal
to release OpenJPA 0.9.6-incubating. Pursuant to the Releases section
of the Incubation Policy
On Nov 10, 2006, at 7:03 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
On 11/10/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
6. Cayenne:
Mentors:Jean Anderson, Brian McAllister, Bill Dudney
Started:March 2006
Incomplete: Nothing
Diverity: Unknown
Releases: 1
All eight
Unless we change the name to open binary, I'm going to agree with
Robert and Justin. Source releases are what we're about here.
Craig
On Nov 4, 2006, at 10:10 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 11/4/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
the same way it's used for any other
burrell donkin wrote:
On 11/2/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Martin,
Thanks for your comments. They seem to contradict what Henri is
saying. Can we continue this discussion until we reach some
conclusion?
from a legal perspective:
5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You
It's best practice to require that contributions be accompanied by
the checkbox to grant the license. I haven't seen any official Apache
policy guideline on this subject.
Is the contributor willing to re-attach the file to the JIRA, this
time with the checkbox ticked? That's the best way
Given that there is a checkbox in JIRA, and the fact that this is
confusing at least, could we get the checkbox removed, or the policy
documented?
Craig
On Nov 1, 2006, at 4:11 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On 11/1/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's best practice to require
Hi Martin,
Thanks for your comments. They seem to contradict what Henri is
saying. Can we continue this discussion until we reach some conclusion?
Thanks,
Craig
On Nov 1, 2006, at 6:57 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 11/1/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given
I wonder (out loud) if we might recommend to change the format of the
[RESULT] [VOTE] tally to simply summarize the binding votes, just for
completeness. Clearly, the people who need to know who the binding
votes are already know it, and it doesn't strike folks quite in the
face if they
Congratulations on the board vote.
+1 for graduation, and good luck.
Craig
On Oct 25, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
As noted in the vote email :
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Under the Incubator process, Harmony must have a destination prior
to exiting incubation, which means the
+1 (non-binding, but opinionated)
Craig
On 10/12/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based upon all of the discussion, I'll pose the following as what I
hope is
an agreeable solution:
--
The Champion shall work with the incoming community to identify the
Hi Jean,
Your suggestion looks sound to me.
Craig
On Oct 10, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Given recent PPMC discussions on general@, it has been on my mind
to add a
section titled Voting in a new PPMC member to
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
Brian McCallister
encumber Apache.
Craig
On Oct 10, 2006, at 2:16 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 10/10/06, Jean T. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/10/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jean,
Your suggestion looks sound to me.
+1
Some clarifications are needed on the PPMC page
Hi Andrus,
Congratulations on your release candidate.
I was unable to retrieve your key B8AF90BF from the public key server
pgp.mit.edu, which you used to sign the release. Have you had your
key signed and uploaded it to a public server?
Craig
On Sep 30, 2006, at 9:09 AM, Andrus Adamchik
://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=Andrus+Adamchikop=index
Andrus
On Oct 3, 2006, at 11:20 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Andrus,
Congratulations on your release candidate.
I was unable to retrieve your key B8AF90BF from the public key
server pgp.mit.edu, which you used to sign the release
On Sep 13, 2006, at 10:24 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 9/13/06, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
On 9/13/06, Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/12/06, Niclas Hedhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Leo pointed out, 'codebase quality' is not a
Hi Jeremy,
On Sep 9, 2006, at 8:53 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Sep 8, 2006, at 7:23 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for doing this. I think it's great for podlings to get a
leg up.
I'd like to understand where this POM is documented so that
podlings can use and understand
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for doing this. I think it's great for podlings to get a leg up.
I'd like to understand where this POM is documented so that podlings
can use and understand it.
Just a link to the incubator web page that tells podlings what they
need to do to use it would let me see how
+1 (non-binding)
Craig
On Aug 28, 2006, at 12:23 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin (JIRA) wrote:
[policy neutral] cut line which doesn't make much sense
---
Key: INCUBATOR-43
URL:
+1 (non-binding)
Craig
On Aug 28, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin (JIRA) wrote:
[policy neutral] consistent use of term
---
Key: INCUBATOR-42
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/
INCUBATOR-42
I've looked at the incubator pages and can't find guidance on how to set up a jira or bug reporting system for a new project. It's absent from the incubation/Incubation_Policy area, and the general "request project resources" doesn't seem to have any information either.If there's consensus on
I updated the page and updated the site. Waiting for the sync.
Craig
On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 8/26/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After the reorganization of the incubator site, the main page has
at least
three broken links:
pThere
On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:22 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On 8/27/06, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was discussion that incubator repository would not be sync'd to
the central repository but I don't really see much point in this.
[...]
Also someone may make an repository request
After the reorganization of the incubator site, the main page has at least three broken links:pThere is a lot more detail available on 1. a href=""what the incubator is responsible for/a and 2. a href=""how we do that/a. Please see the menu on the left./p3. a href=""the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi David, Upayavira,
Thanks, I figured it out from the instructions on the site. After I
updated the site it successfully rsync'd to the live site. And now
you can see it too.
Thanks,
Craig
On Aug 16, 2006, at 6:17 PM, David Crossley wrote:
Upayavira wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
Ok
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:57 AM, Alan Conway wrote:
Idiotic question from complete Apache newbie: is the proposal that
Apache should start hosting specs but would still host projects
implementing foreign specs, or that Apache should stop hosting
projects
implementing non-Apache specs?
I
On Aug 15, 2006, at 5:23 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Yoav Shapira wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I would put forth a strawman that the Editor role is at least
somewhat analogous to the Release Manager for code.
there's a big difference: a release manager does not modify other
people's work
Hi Bob,
On Aug 14, 2006, at 8:17 AM, Bob Scheifler wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
However, we do have a chance here to host the governance and spec
process for JINI.
Therefore, I'd like to propose that we create two podlings, one
for JINI
governance, and one for building the
On Aug 14, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Granqvist, Hans wrote:
...
I would be in favor of such an approach. Honestly, I would
vastly prefer to have Open Specifications managed under ASF
processes than under the JCP, OASIS, etc.
Yea, I think it could be a good idea.
I agree.
Just a few thoughts on
On Aug 13, 2006, at 11:50 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
Just as I was posting the vote thread for the Glasgow project, I saw
Noel had updated the new wiki page with a concern about the name
collision with the old Sun codename
Only because I hadn't seen Craig's e-mail
need to come to agreement
on how to do the CaPs.
a.) Qpid
b.) QPid
c.) QPID
I like a, then c.
Carl.
sophitia que wrote:
I am +1 on the name.
On 8/10/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:49 AM, Archit Shah wrote:
+1 for Qpid or QPid or QPID.
+1 I'd prefer
Hi Bob,
On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Bob Scheifler wrote:
Jim Hurley wrote:
Besides the 'name question' -- are there any other questions or
issues
associated with the JiniProposal that we could be discussing?
Since resolution on the name question (so far) seems clear as mud :(
let's try
Hi Robert,
I like it. I fixed a few typos. I don't know how to actually publish
the site, though...
Craig
On Aug 10, 2006, at 2:27 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/participation.html is currently a
draft document. i think that it's strong enough to push
Ok, I took the plunge and built the site. I checked in the updated
participation.html page.
Craig
On Aug 10, 2006, at 2:27 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/participation.html is currently a
draft document. i think that it's strong enough to push towards
On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:49 AM, Archit Shah wrote:
+1 for Qpid or QPid or QPID.
+1 I'd prefer if the acronym expansion is left unspecified as well.
Craig
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Has anyone ever considered making IRC chats available (on some basis)
as an Apache archive? Seems that Apache (myself included) doesn't
like IRC so much because it is not available to those of us who
because of time zone or other reasons can't attend.
If it's added to an Apache archive, it
Hi,
On Aug 9, 2006, at 6:06 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
Has anyone ever considered making IRC chats available (on some
basis) as
an Apache archive? Seems that Apache (myself included) doesn't
like IRC
so much because it is not available to those of us who because
URQPD.
Craig
On Aug 9, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Brian McCallister wrote:
AMQPD
-Brian
On Aug 9, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
How about Qpid? It could mean Queuing Protocol for Information
Delivery or something like that.
Carl Trieloff wrote:
+1 for Kyma easy to say, read and
I'd like to point out that Apache does have tolerance for brand
names coming in from the outside, in particular J-word projects
from Sun.
Java(TM) Data Objects a.k.a. JDO is an official Apache project [1].
JDO is not trademarked but the name is well-known in its space. The
Apache JDO
On Aug 7, 2006, at 12:49 PM, Kim van der Riet wrote:
I have been somewhat surprised at the amount of debate surrounding the
name of the proposed Glasgow project.
Same here, and I've been on this alias for over a year. Most of the
discussion earlier has been over infringement issues, not
+1 (non-binding) from me.
Craig
On Aug 3, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
I believe all open questions about the Glasgow proposal (originally
submitted as Blaze) have now been addressed enough to call a vote
for accepting the project for incubation.
Therefore, as the champion of this
+1 (non-binding) for all three. I've commented on /INCUBATOR-39 but
vote in favor regardless of the resolution.
Craig
On Jul 29, 2006, at 2:44 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
a few more changes that i think that policy neutral (please jump in if
i am mistaken)
i'm +1to all
- robert
On Jul 30, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Gwyn Evans wrote:
On 30/07/06, Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/27/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we take the code in the Apache incubator svn, build a
release, and
release it on sf.net (our previous host) without branding
Hi Martijn,
My email is spotty for some reason; I haven't seen much feedback for
you on the alias. Here's my take:
On Jul 27, 2006, at 7:04 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Can we take the code in the Apache incubator svn, build a release, and
release it on sf.net (our previous host) without
I think of no associations with software projects when hearing Glasgow.
Craig
On Jul 27, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 7/27/06, Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Garrett
Some of us spoke about this at lunch. As Glasgow
Hi Martin,
For just a moment, I thought you were serious.
JavaBeans Activation Framework, 1999.
JavaBeans Drag and Drop, 1998.
If Glasgow were really a software name to be worried about, I think
we might have heard more of it in the last 6 years...
Craig
On Jul 27, 2006, at 6:48 PM,
Hi Carl,
On Jul 24, 2006, at 10:40 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
The synapse ones are clearly software though... At this point I am
not trying
to argue to use or non-use of a name. Just understand how does
Apache deals with this.
The way Apache deals with this is that you get advice from
I've added comments to the JIRA issues and vote +1 (non-binding) to
all the proposals.
Craig
On Jul 23, 2006, at 9:17 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
try again with a better subject
On 7/20/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i've been working on tidying up the policy
On Jul 18, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
since some members thinks that insulting our fellows
is actually a great joke, and something one should
be proud off, I'm fine.
Well, let me just say that once a project is within
the incubator,
Hi,I volunteered to write a guide for incubator web sites, and created the attached xml file as a start. A few logistics questions:The file is in the incubator/trunk/site-author/guides/ directory as sites.xml. This is the location and name that Robert and I discussed at ApacheCon 2006. Is this
Hi Jim,
On Jul 5, 2006, at 5:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jul 3, 2006, at 6:45 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Dan,
I have to agree that if an existing code base is migrated to
Apache, it should not mean that all maintenance ceases on the
existing code. There are good reasons
Hi Dan,
I have to agree that if an existing code base is migrated to Apache,
it should not mean that all maintenance ceases on the existing code.
There are good reasons for projects dependent on the existing code
base to be able to stay on it and not move to the Apache line just
because
Hi,
I'll attend the Dublin conference, getting in Tuesday late morning.
I'm interested in contributing, especially to the sample incubator
project template in the area of template web site and template build
scripts based on maven. I haven't seen much on these topics recently,
so I guess
Hi Garrett,
I tried to switch my svn workspace but it didn't work.
Instead of me showing my ignorance, could you please tell me which
directory I should be in and what svn command to execute to perform
the switch?
Thanks,
Craig
On May 8, 2006, at 3:59 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On
Hi Garrett,
Worked great. Thanks.
Craig
On May 9, 2006, at 9:30 AM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 5/9/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Garrett,
I tried to switch my svn workspace but it didn't work.
Instead of me showing my ignorance, could you please tell me which
directory I
+1 from me. I'd also like to see the wiki and jira set up if we've
agreed on the name.
Craig
On May 8, 2006, at 10:48 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
+1 from me.
On 5/8/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did we decide to do this? I am willing to help make the change if I
can.
-dain
everyone agreed to,
had open-jpa-dev in it, so it was created that way. Do you all
think that it's a killer problem to have that hypen in the list
name when everything else is OpenJPA?
geir
Craig L Russell wrote:
+1 from me. I'd also like to see the wiki and jira set up if we've
agreed
, Craig L Russell wrote:
The names with hypens will be changed once the project graduates
from the incubator, so I don't see it as an issue.
Craig
On May 8, 2006, at 1:33 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I don't understand the problem. The project is OpenJPA. The
wiki is OpenJPA. The project
Hi George,
Try reply all which sends the message to accept plus approve. One
is for this single message; the other is a permanent allow.
Craig
On Apr 23, 2006, at 6:09 PM, George Aroush wrote:
Hi folks,
Even though I have subscribed to Lucene.Net mailing list, when I
submit an
email to
[X] +1(non-binding) Accept the OpenJPA proposal
Craig
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
What follows is the official proposal for OpenJPA. The unofficial
version can be found here
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenJPAProposal
Please vote on acceptance of this proposal. The vote will run
On Mar 10, 2006, at 8:58 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Saturday 11 March 2006 03:21, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Which is a really long-winded way of saying: At graduation,
maybe it's worthwhile to see whether the podling committers
actually earned any Apache merit.
Agree. That would also
Hi Tom,
I think we might have a better chance at unifying these disparate
code bases if they are all in one place. And I think that DB might be
just the place.
For the record, the Apache JDO project has no ORM engine. It has the
testing infrastructure for ORM and it has the JDO
Hi Yoav,
On Mar 7, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
:Core Developers:
Fourteen of the initial committers are BEA employees. One of those
is a
committer on the Apache JDO project. We anticipate that five of these
fourteen will be involved in the core code development, and the other
nine
Hi Ken,
I reviewed the proposal and yeah, it looks good to me. (non-binding)
CORBA is a huge piece of work and I'm not surprised that it takes 22.
I'd be surprised if the number of initial committers were less than
13. (random number generator 6..18)
Craig
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:41 PM,
On Jan 25, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Raphaël Luta wrote: As far I can tell, what needs to happen to fully OSS AjaxTk is something like this: - cleanup the code/doc/install so that Tk can be consumed by a public communityIt seems to me that something that works in some cases but isn't fully developed as
On Jan 1, 2006, at 10:45 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:I've been wanting to create a skin for Forrest that looks like that at http://www.apache.org for some time. Mostly because the default Forrest skins are, well "old".The recent thread here discussing Forrest as a tool has finally prompted me into
I haven't been involved in any history here, so please forgive my naivete.I think I understand the rationale for developing spec jars here at Apache. Please correct me if I'm wrong. In order to use a spec jar from the JCP, you have to click a license every time you download it. And this can be a
On Jan 1, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:Alan D. Cabrera wrote: Craig, you hit the nail on the head with this. I am running into this now. The impetus for my attempting to start this is that I currently have to go on an easter egg hunt for spec jars. I have no strong feelings how
I have a few observations that might help inform what we do here.1. There is often what you might call "implementation" in the javax.spec domain. There are bootstrap classes in the JSR 220 and JSRs 12 and 243 that must be implemented by the javax code. And Exceptions and Errors have to be classes.
On Dec 30, 2005, at 9:50 AM, Brett Porter wrote:On 12/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it was just coming out of incubation, but yes, that's somethingwe should point to somehow. I agree. This point actually raises something else - it would be a bitsilly to have a specs
On Dec 30, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:Brett Porter wrote: On 12/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it was just coming out of incubation, but yes, that's somethingwe should point to somehow. I agree. This point actually raises something else - it would be a
On Dec 30, 2005, at 10:57 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:Craig L Russell wrote: On Dec 30, 2005, at 10:18 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: Does it need to? only if people want it. JPOX is the RI, and I always feel that a truly competitive impl of a spec isn't going to be the RI. You don't want to do
On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:55 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:On Dec 21, 2005, at 7:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is the idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or have I completely missed the Tao of the voting process
Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is the idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or have I completely missed the Tao of the voting process in Apache?I thought that after a -1 the discussion started again on the disagreements.I'm still looking for an
Hi,-0 (non-binding)Not to throw a monkey wrench into this, but:Are we really sure that it's that easy changing an email alias at graduation time? Unlike svn repos that only a few folks use, mailing lists are widespread. Have you thought about exactly how to transition from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
Here's some:[ ] make sure all committers have commit access to their new repository.[ ] make sure all committers know how to / have karma to update the new web siteCraigOn Dec 18, 2005, at 7:30 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:Here's a few:[ ] Submit Infra request to move mailing lists and archives.
+1 (non-binding) We're excited to be considered for graduation into the DB TLP.CraigOn Dec 4, 2005, at 7:41 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:I repurposed the discussion thread for continuity to call for a vote. There has been no concern or objection noted in the last two weeks, so I'll assume that
Hi,
On Nov 18, 2005, at 8:11 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I'd like to propose that the JDO podling graduate from incubation.
I'll call for a vote if this discussion is positive.
They are about to do a release, and figure they'd like to do that
in their new home at DB rather than in
601 - 696 of 696 matches
Mail list logo
