On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Cory Johns wrote:
> Marvin,
>
> We've been having some discussion and I'd just like to clarify something
> you said:
>
>> Any artifact that is being distributed through Apache channels is
>> supposed to adhere to our policies.
>
> Does this mean that as long as we
Marvin,
We've been having some discussion and I'd just like to clarify something
you said:
> Any artifact that is being distributed through Apache channels is
supposed to
> adhere to our policies.
Does this mean that as long as we are releasing the sub-packages on PyPI
only, and not through Apac
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Cory Johns wrote:
> I had one question regarding the NOTICE and LICENSE files issue that you
> mentioned on the [VOTE] thread. We were considering, in the future,
> potentially releasing each of the Allura and Forge sub-packages separately
> on pypi to ease confi
sebb,
Thanks for your feedback. I have created a wiki page at
https://forge-allura.apache.org/p/allura/wiki/ASF%20Release%20Notes/ to
gather all the feedback we've gotten, and I will begin correcting the
issues raised. Once those have been addressed, I think we will do a 1.0.1
release to get the
Forgot to say:
AFAIK, Git tags are not immutable, so the vote e-mail should contain
the hash for the tag.
On 16 September 2013 23:30, sebb wrote:
> On 16 September 2013 14:17, Dave Brondsema wrote:
>> IPMC members, hello again. We are still waiting for your votes to be
>> cast for Allura's fir
Sorry, again forgot:
It's useful to have a link to the RAT report (or equivalent) showing
that files have the appropriate license headers.
On 16 September 2013 23:33, sebb wrote:
> Forgot to say:
>
> AFAIK, Git tags are not immutable, so the vote e-mail should contain
> the hash for the tag.
>
>
On 16 September 2013 14:17, Dave Brondsema wrote:
> IPMC members, hello again. We are still waiting for your votes to be
> cast for Allura's first release: see vote thread Aug portion [1] and
> Sept portion [2]
>
> If there is anything the Allura PPMC can provide or do, to help, please
> let us k
IPMC members, hello again. We are still waiting for your votes to be
cast for Allura's first release: see vote thread Aug portion [1] and
Sept portion [2]
If there is anything the Allura PPMC can provide or do, to help, please
let us know. I think we're just waiting on you all, though.
I hope s
On 10 September 2013 10:31, Dave Brondsema wrote:
> On 9/9/13 12:22 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> >> Hmm. Did we do something wrong with our call for vote?
>
...
> >> Can anyone suggest any reason why we've gotten ZERO response to this
> me
On 9/9/13 12:22 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>> Hmm. Did we do something wrong with our call for vote?
>
> Perhaps not this one, though the voting on allura-dev@incubator was somewhat
> irregular.
>
> * No "[VOTE]" in the subject.
> * Spread
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Hmm. Did we do something wrong with our call for vote?
Perhaps not this one, though the voting on allura-dev@incubator was somewhat
irregular.
* No "[VOTE]" in the subject.
* Spread out over multiple threads.
* No time specification. (I
Thanks, Marvin. I can't believe I left those out. For reference they are
given below, and I will reply on the [VOTE] thread with them as well.
[1] VOTE thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-allura-dev/201308.mbox/%3CCAEMb8zUbH2ZyuQOAA1OWf%2BwVXaK_q_GAc%3DN4BzyVG2E8OtprNw%40m
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Cory Johns wrote:
> A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with 9 +1's, and 0
> -1's or +0's (vote thread [1], discussion thread [2] which some of the
> votes were cast on, due to some confusion, and result thread [3]), and now
> requires a vote
13 matches
Mail list logo
