On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:52 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
Your second suggestion sounds like the thing to do to me - separating
IPMC-ship and Mentor-ship - that would solve several of the problems
we've being having including this one, it would open up a much bigger
pool of
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
...As to whether such lists should be encouraged for new podlings (probably by
putting a stub in the proposal template alongside the other lists), I can't
say that I have a strong opinion
IIUC Noah's proposal
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:35 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:52 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
...Your second suggestion sounds like the thing to do to me - separating
IPMC-ship and Mentor-ship...
...I'd like to
try this, perhaps as a sort of
John D. Ament created PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31:
--
Summary: Establish whether Apache DeltaSpike is a suitable name
Key: PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31
Hi,
As I said before I'm currently against having mentors who are not
Incubator PMC members,
As an aside it seems (and please correct me if I'm mistaken) in order to become
a IPMC member you first need to be an Apache member (see bottom of [1]).This
may exclude people with practical
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Justin Mclean justinmcl...@gmail.com wrote:
...As an aside it seems (and please correct me if I'm mistaken) in order to
become
a IPMC member you first need to be an Apache member (see bottom of [1])...
you don't - Apache members can become IPMC members just
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013, at 10:44 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
Hi,
As I said before I'm currently against having mentors who are not
Incubator PMC members,
As an aside it seems (and please correct me if I'm mistaken) in order to
become a IPMC member you first need to be an Apache member (see
I suppose that as chair I ought to be heard from here. I've been off for
Passover for a bit.
In my view, the IPMC manifests two problems. I'd like to label them as
'operational' and 'decision-making'. This thread is about decision-making,
but with some people seeing using terms like
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13615145#comment-13615145
]
Mark Struberg commented on PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31:
Hi!
For having
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Struberg updated PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31:
---
Attachment: deltaspike.com Bildschirmfoto 2013-03-27 um
FYI, Apache DeltaSpike looking to graduate soon.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Date: Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:35 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Recommending DeltaSpike for Graduation to an Apache Top
Level Project
To: deltaspike-us...@incubator.apache.org
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all,
Apache Onami entered incubation before more than 3 months. Since then
the community has proven to be pretty active and healthy.
A few releases were made and the status page has been
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier
grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
...We now kindly ask the IPMC to review our findings and vote on the
Onami graduation...
+1
-Bertrand
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
+1 (binding)
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 8:04 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Onami as TLD
Hi all,
Apache Onami entered
On Mar 26, 2013, at 3:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
We now kindly ask the IPMC to review our findings and vote on the
Onami graduation.
[ X ] +1, yes propose the graduation of Apache Onami to the board
[ ] -1, no, don't let Apache Onami graduate, because...
+1
--
Rich Bowen
Bertrand, yes, I am not sold on the idea of doing it by default. But
perhaps sort of advisory, highlighting it as an option, and giving reasons
why it might be a good idea for some projects?
What would I have to do to add that? If I prepare a patch to the docs,
would it be CTR or RTC?
On 27
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
Bertrand, yes, I am not sold on the idea of doing it by default. But
perhaps sort of advisory, highlighting it as an option, and giving reasons
why it might be a good idea for some projects?
Yes, sounds good to me if it's
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Benson Margulies
bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Or it might 'work', but some might feel that this large,
diffuse, group, operating by majority rules is either inconsistent with
Apache policy or a bad example for the podlings.
Thats more how i see it. Using
The incubator is currently of a scale that means it can no longer operate
as a standard consensus driven PMC. It is not that much smaller than the
TLPs part of the foundation. Perhaps it would make sense to see how the
model that has scaled well for the foundation can be applied here:
ASF Members
On 27 March 2013 15:54, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Benson Margulies
bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, i propose we have an experiment [1] where we try having a mentor
or two who are not PMC members. Have some other experienced mentors
helping to
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
I am under the impression that having a low-volume, high-signal
announcement channel is generally beneficial to most projects that try it.
I
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 27 March 2013 15:54, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Benson Margulies
bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, i propose we have an experiment [1] where we try having a mentor
or
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
Bertrand, yes, I am not sold on the idea of doing it by default. But
perhaps sort of advisory, highlighting it as an option, and giving reasons
why it might be a good idea for some projects?
What would I have to do to add
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13615470#comment-13615470
]
Jason Porter commented on PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31:
---
IIRC, Dan was the
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.comwrote:
Perhaps it would make sense to see how the
model that has scaled well for the foundation can be applied here:
... [snip] ...
Why can't the IPMC work like that? Well, to a large extent it does. Here
are the
On 27 March 2013 16:28, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
Do the general announce list lag behind because there are individual lists
?
I see no reason why they would.
On 27 March 2013 16:31, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
The minute that is in the guides, I'm
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
So we just set out a policy for podlings to follow that says something
like: if you use a project-specific announce@ list, anything you send to it
must also be copied to annou...@apache.org, and vice-versa.
This is how I
Putting it in policy is probably as close as we can get to automation. ;)
On 27 March 2013 17:23, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
So we just set out a policy for podlings to follow that says something
like:
On 27 March 2013 17:23, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
So we just set out a policy for podlings to follow that says something
like: if you use a project-specific announce@ list, anything you send to it
must
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote:
So we just set out a policy for podlings to follow that says something
like: if you use a project-specific announce@ list, anything you send to
On 27 Mar 2013 16:43, Greg Reddin gred...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.comwrote:
Perhaps it would make sense to see how the
model that has scaled well for the foundation can be applied here:
... [snip] ...
Why can't the IPMC
My personal experience: There are a few people registered to
annou...@apache.org, but there is a low registration rate for the respective
subproject lists. At least not for most projects.
Thus said: if you would create an announce list for all projects and send the
ANN mails only to those
On 27 March 2013 18:37, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
My personal experience: There are a few people registered to
annou...@apache.org, but there is a low registration rate for the
respective subproject lists. At least not for most projects.
That's to be expected, though, right? We
Hi everyone,
this is a call for a vote to release Apache S4 0.6.0 incubating.
A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed for RC3 with 6+1's with
5 of them binding:
+1 IPMC (phunt)
+1PPMC (mmorel, kishoreg, leoneu, fpj)
+1 committer non PPMC (dferro)
Here is the vote thread on
On 27 March 2013 19:07, Matthieu Morel mmo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
this is a call for a vote to release Apache S4 0.6.0 incubating.
A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed for RC3 with 6+1's
with 5 of them binding:
+1 IPMC (phunt)
+1PPMC (mmorel, kishoreg,
Hi,
this is a very interesting proposal. Let me ask a few questions.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
Why shouldn't the IPMC create an equivalent to the one item in the above
governance structure that is missing today. That is why shouldn't it
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
On 27 Mar 2013 20:12, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
this is a very interesting proposal. Let me ask a few questions.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
Why
Thanks for the feedback,
I replied inline.
On Mar 27, 2013, at 21:00 , sebb wrote:
On 27 March 2013 19:07, Matthieu Morel mmo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
this is a call for a vote to release Apache S4 0.6.0 incubating.
A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed
+1
Niall
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier
grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Apache Onami entered incubation before more than 3 months. Since then
the community has proven to be pretty active and healthy.
A few releases were made and the status page has been completed:
The first thing I'd like to do, coordination-wise, is to call a vote on the
proposal to decide things by majority. I think that this would help with
some of the problems we hit, and we can meanwhile continue to discuss
larger structural changes.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Ross Gardler
On 27 March 2013 20:57, Matthieu Morel mmo...@apache.org wrote:
Thanks for the feedback,
I replied inline.
On Mar 27, 2013, at 21:00 , sebb wrote:
On 27 March 2013 19:07, Matthieu Morel mmo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
this is a call for a vote to release Apache S4 0.6.0
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote:
One alternative to going for full-on majority voting is to recognize that a
larger group is much more likely to have noisy vetoes by requiring that
This whole exercise is pointless. Just drop the notion of vetoes for all IPMC
votes and carry on as before.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 27, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it should be 3/4 majority.
I agree that supermajority would be better than simple majority here.
Moving to simple majority seems too radical. Over time it's more
prone to building a PMC that cannot easily
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com
wrote:
One alternative to going for full-on majority voting is to
+1 (binding).
Good luck!
Cheers,
Chris
On 3/26/13 12:04 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Apache Onami entered incubation before more than 3 months. Since then
the community has proven to be pretty active and healthy.
A few releases were made and the status page has
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13616084#comment-13616084
]
Charles Moulliard commented on PODLINGNAMESEARCH-31:
Name is
47 matches
Mail list logo
