On Jun 18, 2016 2:05 PM, "Gilles" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 11:00:34 -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Gilles
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> I'm asking, again, whether I need to initiate a VOTE that would allow me
>>> to set up a workspace ("git", etc.) and transfer
Hi,
I am concerned about potential confusion with Apache Commons Weaver [1].
Matt
[1] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-weaver/
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Andreas Neumann wrote:
> I would like to propose Weave, an abstraction over Apache Hadoop® YARN to
> reduce the complexity
+1 (binding)
Matt
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Since discussion about the BatchEE seems done, I'd like to call a vote for
> BatchEE to
> become an incubated project.
>
> The proposal is pasted below, and also available at:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Bat
e to fork?
>
> I think this last came up with BeanShell.
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Matt Benson
> wrote:
> > JSR 352 is part of Java EE 7, so BatchEE is IMO warranted. Plus the
> > rhyming of "Apache BatchEE" is silly and fun.
> >
JSR 352 is part of Java EE 7, so BatchEE is IMO warranted. Plus the
rhyming of "Apache BatchEE" is silly and fun.
$0.02,
Matt
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> easybatch is used by others already.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2013/9/19
+1 (binding)
Matt
On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The Apache DeltaSpike podling is a project which contains common CDI
> Extensions which are portable among many different Java EE containers and
> even run on standalone CDI containers.
>
> We are now incubating
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Nicolas Lalevée wrote:
>
>>
>> Le 5 juil. 2012 à 06:35, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
>>
>>> On 2012-07-04, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
On Jul 3, 2012, at 12:06 PM, Nicolas Lalevée wrote:
> Le 3 juil. 2012 à 19:00,
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi IPMC folks!
>
> I'd like to call the 2nd round (IPMC review/vote) for our
> DeltaSpike-0.2-incubating release!
>
> See the attached thread for the release artifacts and the podling VOTE
> results.
>
> We have 14 +1 inclucing 2 IPMC +1 s
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zit
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi...
>
> It has been discussed, since a while, about the graduation of Apache
> BVal, whether to graduate to a TLP or Subproject and whether it is time or
> not, [1], [2] and [3].
> In the past few weeks there has been a [VOTE], [4],
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
wrote:
> Hi...
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Ralph Goers
>> wrote:
>> > Is this a discussion thread or a vote thread? If it is a vote thre
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Is this a discussion thread or a vote thread? If it is a vote thread please
> restart it with [VOTE]. If you want to discuss whether the project should
> graduate then we can do that.
This is a quick (formal) discussion. We'd like to procee
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the first incubator release for Apache DeltaSpike, with the
> artifacts being versioned as 0.1-incubating.
>
> We have received 16 binding +1 votes (including 4 votes of IPMC members)
> during the release voting on deltaspik
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We have another question on this topic... RH counsel wants to know why
>> clause 4 rather than clause 7 of the ICLA doesn't serve our purpos
from the Solder and Seam 3 codebases; thus a software
grant is a bit of overkill, but saves committers having to disclaim
each commit as clause 7 would do.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> Adding deltaspike-dev back to the distribution:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3
Adding deltaspike-dev back to the distribution:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> ok - matt and i just had a short talk with sam to ensure that we are
> talking about the same.
> it isn't the only way, but to resolve it once and for all it's easier to
> handle it via a so
ituation, or variants of
> it.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>
>> This thread brings up another issue. During this process we have
>> encountered the sentiment that the ASF's insistence on (arguably)
>> extensiv
This thread brings up another issue. During this process we have
encountered the sentiment that the ASF's insistence on (arguably)
extensive documentation to import e.g. ALv2-licensed code seems to
express a lack of confidence in "its own" license on the part of the
ASF. My response has been, par
;t enough, imo it's faster to ask redhat to write
>> a formal letter that they grant us access explicitly.
>>
>> for sure that's just my personal opinion.
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>> [1] http://goo.gl/u3ewl
>> [2] http://pla
Hi, all--per [1], "Generally, the mentors of a new project will need
to consult with general@incubator.apache.org or the Apache legal team
about the particular circumstances." So, here I am.
The situation can be read in detail at [2], but in short is this:
DeltaSpike is intended to amalgamate "be
It may also be pertinent to note that the codebases here in question
are also ALv2 licensed.
Matt
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> Hi, all--per [1], "Generally, the mentors of a new project will need
> to consult with general@incubator.apache.org or the Apache
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 to graduate, with the following note:
>
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
>> interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
>> Foundation's pu
+1
Matt
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>
> Dear IPMC, dear Community!
>
> The Apache Bean-Validation project provides an ALv2 licensed implementation
> of the JSR-303 Bean Validation Specification and would like to start a VOTE
> on graduating as a TLP.
> The podling is
+1
Matt
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi...
>
> It has been discussed, since a while, about the graduation of Apache
> Bean Validation, whether to graduate to a TLP or Subproject and whether it
> is time or not, [1], [2] and [3].
> In the past few weeks there ha
; --
>>>
>>>
>>> Mailing Lists
>>>
>>>
>>> * deltaspike-us...@incubator.apache.org
>>> * deltaspike-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> * deltaspike-comm...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> That would explain why he claimed to have mailed BeanValidation-dev,
> and our yet having failed AFAIK to receive the notification.
>
Er, strike that--we got it after all.
> Matt
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Fra
That would explain why he claimed to have mailed BeanValidation-dev,
and our yet having failed AFAIK to receive the notification.
Matt
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Francis De Brabandere
wrote:
> Same thing on empire-db-dev@ I suppose Marvin (bot) somehow mailed the
> wrong projects.
>
> Cheer
Mmm, shouldn't voting be carried out in a separate "[VOTE] Accept
DeltaSpike..." thread?
Matt
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> PS: Updated the proposal to re-
Certainly you can... typically you would drop a mail requesting
membership in the Incubator PMC to go along with your mentor status,
on this very list IIRC.
Matt
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi all guys,
> this mail for asking for clarification if, having been recently
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:38 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 7 April 2011 18:14, Donald Woods wrote:
>> This is the third release of Apache Bean Validation.
>>
>> We have already received 4 binding IPMC votes during the PPMC voting
>> below, so I'm requesting a 72 hour lazy consensus before releasing the
>>
On Nov 19, 2010, at 3:48 AM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> lets vote on the acceptance of the OpenNLP Project for incubation
> at the Apache Incubator.
>
> The proposal is on the wiki
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenNLPProposal
> and a copy is included below.
>
> The discussion thread
On Nov 12, 2010, at 2:20 AM, ant elder wrote:
> I'd like to propose that the process for Incubator poddlings to make
> someone a new committer is simplified so that all that is needed are
> votes from poddling committers and that there is no longer any need
> for votes from Incubator PMC members
On Aug 18, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Now that the board has declared there are no legal
> obstacles to what I have proposed, I'd like to
> restart the vote.
>
+1
-Matt
> Thanks for your patience and consideration.
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Joe Schaefer
>>
On Aug 11, 2010, at 4:14 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message
>
>> From: Davanum Srinivas
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Wed, August 11, 2010 5:07:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: an experiment
>>
>> +1 to IPMC delegates to the PPMC the decision-making
>> process for
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> From: Noel J. Bergman
> Subject: RE: Commons issues WAS RE: [PROPOSAL] Commons Incubator
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Thursday, April 16, 2009, 11:30 AM
> Matt Benson wrote:
>
> > I'll apologize in ad
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> From: Niclas Hedhman
> Subject: Re: Commons issues WAS RE: [PROPOSAL] Commons Incubator
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Thursday, April 16, 2009, 4:47 AM
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:07 AM,
> Matt Benson
>
I'll apologize in advance because I will probably sound like a total dick in
this email being that I'm irritated for unrelated reasons at the moment. Now
I'll attempt to steer this beast of a thread back on course while it's still
possible to do so:
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Jochen Wiedmann wrote
Two comments:
(1) A Commons Incubator in the form put forth in the incubation proposal of the
same name does not seem likely to happen, given the feedback on this list so
far.
(2) If Commons would accept Sanselan, it having already been through the
incubator would graduate as a proper, or pos
--- On Tue, 4/14/09, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> From: Jochen Wiedmann
> Subject: Re: Commons issues WAS RE: [PROPOSAL] Commons Incubator
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 1:22 AM
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 4:42 AM,
> Niclas Hedhman
> wrote:
>
> > There seems t
oel J. Bergman wrote:
> From: Noel J. Bergman
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Commons Incubator
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Sunday, April 12, 2009, 9:49 PM
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> > Matt Benson
> wrote:
> > > The Commons Incubator would act
--- On Fri, 4/10/09, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> From: Torsten Curdt
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Commons Incubator
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Friday, April 10, 2009, 5:32 AM
> Well, the point is: we are
> talking about small libraries.
>
> Imagine there is library X which was devel
ents to be managed by Mentors a la Commons Sandbox
INITIAL COMMITTERS
(Applicable at incubating component level)
AFFILIATIONS
(Applicable at incubating component level)
SPONSORS
Champion: Henri Yandell
Nominated Mentors: Henri Yandell, Matt Benson(, need v
Oops; accidentally sent to general-subscribe:
--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Matt Benson wrote:
> From: Matt Benson
> Subject: Commons Incubator proposal
> To: "incubator-general"
> Cc: priv...@commons.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2009, 10:10 AM
>
> Below is the
The Commons PMC have voted [1] to accept a
contribution [2] of a Java library for the handling of
flat data structures.
The required paperwork has been recorded by the ASF
Secretary, and the IP form completed in the incubator
website [3].
Please inform me of any issues you see.
[1] http://markma
...for IP clearance; could someone push the updated
site out to p.a.o?
Thanks,
Matt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I
> would put the imported code into a special part of
> the TLP's
> repository (e.g. tlp/import next to tlp/trunk) just
> to make sure it
> isn't accidentally shipped.
Thanks for the info, Craig!
-Matt
>
> Of course, running RAT on the release would
Thanks all for the responses received so far (as well
as any yet to come)!
-Matt
--- Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2008 2:36 PM, Jukka Zitting
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 31, 2008 9:20 PM, Matt Benson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
I'm looking for general feedback about the group's
perception of incubated projects and the number of
roles that may be assumed by a foundation member in
one. Can I view RAT as an example that it would be
considered kosher for a member to be both champion of
and an initial committer on a given pro
Another non-binding +1 here.
-Matt
--- Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Wicket joins the Apache Software Foundation as
> Apache Wicket
> Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net:
> ##wicket
> Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. D
--- robert burrell donkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/25/07, Martijn Dashorst
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > From an incubator point of view, I think having
> the sources available
> > is not yet necessary. Having a clear proposal what
> the project is
> > going to do, and who is goin
50 matches
Mail list logo
