On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 01:55 -0500, Curt Arnold wrote:
There has been some discussion about modifying the Logging Services
project bylaws (http://logging.apache.org/site/bylaws.html) to
address some concerns particular to the project. I was researching
the Jakarta guidelines and stumbled
i count 4 +1's
the consensus seems to be in favour of removal so that's what i'm going
to do.
i propose to leave retain the number by noting those that have been
deleted (rather than removing them).
- robert
-
To
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on Jakarta Wiki for
change notification.
The following page has been changed by RobertBurrellDonkin:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/DraftCharterForWebComponentCommons
The comment on the change is:
Deleted point 12
On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 14:33 -0400, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 6/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 14:40 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
4.1 in the guidelines repeats the error that I thought was fixed in the
j-c guidelines saying that each package has
8. Packages are encouraged to either use JavaBeans as core objects, a
JavaBean-style API, or to provide an optional JavaBean wrapper.
doesn't seem very relevant. i think that it'd be simpler just to drop
it.
here's my +1
- robert
--8---
+1 to drop this
Phil
robert burrell donkin wrote:
8. Packages are encouraged to either use JavaBeans as core objects, a
JavaBean-style API, or to provide an optional JavaBean wrapper.
doesn't seem very relevant. i think that it'd be simpler just to drop
it.
here's my +1
- robert
On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 14:52 -0400, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 6/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 14:40 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
snip
Interpreted literally, 17 goes against standard practice in jakarta (or
apache, to my knowledge, other than
On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 12:27 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Martin Cooper wrote:
On 6/23/05, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 14:40 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
snip
Interpreted literally, 17 goes against standard practice in jakarta (or
apache, to my
+1
--
Martin Cooper
On 7/3/05, Phil Steitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 to drop this
Phil
robert burrell donkin wrote:
8. Packages are encouraged to either use JavaBeans as core objects, a
JavaBean-style API, or to provide an optional JavaBean wrapper.
doesn't seem very relevant.
robert burrell donkin wrote:
snip/
Agreed. After a little more discussion, we should rewrite this.
+1
anyone feel like jumping volunteering to come up with a draft?
Working on this now...
Phil
-
To unsubscribe,
+1
-Rahul
On 7/3/05, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
--
Martin Cooper
On 7/3/05, Phil Steitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 to drop this
Phil
robert burrell donkin wrote:
8. Packages are encouraged to either use JavaBeans as core objects, a
JavaBean-style API, or
Here is a stab at replacement text for 15, 17 and 18.
15-1 Any member of the community may propose a new package. To be
accepted, a package proposal must receive majority approval of the
subproject committers and at least one committer must volunteer to serve
as an initial package team member.
On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 13:13 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Here is a stab at replacement text for 15, 17 and 18.
great :)
looks good but threw up some ideas...
15-1 Any member of the community may propose a new package. To be
accepted, a package proposal must receive majority approval of the
13 matches
Mail list logo
