Perhaps we should change the logo on the top right of
http://subversion.apache.org. It still says incubator.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Julian Foad julian.f...@wandisco.com wrote:
Hooray!
Many thanks to you and the other people who each put in a lot of work to
make this happen.
-
We already have Apache Commons Validator. Why not just bring this
code into that project?
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Brett Porter br...@apache.org wrote:
As I understand it from the proposal, they intend to be Apache Commons
Validation.
On 24/02/2010, at 4:19 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On
about the name. If it takes over the Commons
Validator project, then we already have a name. Issue closed. Right?
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:18 AM, James Carman wrote:
We already have Apache Commons Validator. Why not just
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. That's how I view it. It's more than code clearance, however. There are
processes for that, already. Community building is why it is starting off as
an Incubator project. I think graduating to become Commons
The proposal says that this will take over for Commons Validator. Why
are we still discussing names? We already have one, Commons
Validator.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu
cgurkanerdo...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 (non-binding).
OpenBeanValidation as a name will be cool :)
My client is using a variety of Apache projects in their
bio-informatics work. We're using Wicket, a lot of the Commons stuff
(VFS is a *big* one), Lucene, HttpClient, Subversion, Velocity, etc.
We looked into using Hadoop, but decided to go with Mallet instead.
Hadoop was a little
More precisely, that'd be James Carman (Commons). I'm not on the Wicket team.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:56 AM, Dan Haywood dkhayw...@gmail.com wrote:
We're considering proposing a group of related open source projects to the
Apache Incubator. At an unconference a few weekends ago I met
For those of us who haven't mentored before, it might be good to give us a
chance to do some of these things
On Sep 7, 2010 7:49 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
I just created the first JIRA for ISIS infrastructure, but I have this
sinking feeling that I've gotten ahead of
Isn't Isis a different bird though? It has been around for a long time and
is likely to actually have existing users
On Sep 8, 2010 7:04 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, we could neglect to tell anyone about the user list until we need
it.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:16
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:39 AM, dan haywood
d...@haywood-associates.co.uk wrote:
For the moment at least the dev community is more active (or at least more
vocal), so their mailing list should be the main focal point. As I said in
the other email, when we have more user traffic than dev
I'm -1 (don't know if it's binding or not. I requested to join the
PMC, but didn't hear anything back). I think the name is too general.
Why not just choose some animal name or something like everyone else
is doing?
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote:
name=trademark
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Tim Williams william...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm watching the renaming vote thread and I find it odd that folks
are -1-ing the project's vote. I've read the role of the IPMC[1] and
the policy[2] and can't find the basis for our (IPMC) doing anything
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Tim Williams william...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you suggesting there are trademark concerns with the name the
project has chosen? If so, then yes, that's a valid reason for the
IPMC to challenge a project's vote - as a part of 'grooming' them to
think through
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't followed this particular issue because it seems like a
slamdunk easy thing. If the podling wants to change their name, then
fine. Sounds easy enough. I would see no reason for anybody outside
the podling to -1 that
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
As I said, I haven't followed it. I meant if the -1 was a veto. If the
IPMC was vetoing a podling's choices on stuff like this. If you're
only using a vote as a preference/opinion marker, then sure...
definitely no problems
it ;)
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Thu, 9/9/10, James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
From: James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com
Subject: Re: Role of Incubator PMC Votes
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: Thursday, September 9, 2010, 7:17 PM
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Greg
Stein gst
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Tim Williams william...@gmail.com wrote:
That vote is majority rules, so the IPMC could in effect overrule the
project - the preference/opinion had already previously been
gathered. In any case, I was using that instance to ask the broader
question of why we
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
To be clear, we where asking for a [VOTE] and not a [DISCUSS] - we
wanted the vote to ratify our own vote on the subject. There was already
a long discussion on general and the connectors mailing list - tons of
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
From the mentor standpoint, what's important to me is that there is no
ASF requirement to change those packages. The community can decide to
do it sooner, later, or not at all. The community can decide to make a
+1, I bought an Android development book a while back, but haven't had
the opportunity to do any real Android development. I'd be interested
in seeing what others are up to.
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com wrote:
About a half dozen or so of us met up at
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
So Skype calls are fine (and I like Craig's list of criteria for
them), but as far as the ASF is concerned they don't count - anything
important has to happen on list. Audio transcripts are useless IMO.
Right,
Aren't those emails supposed to be sent to the moderators of the list, not
to just anyone subscribed to it?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 9:28 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why am I getting those
- Brett
On 4/24/06, James Carman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't those emails supposed to be sent to the moderators of the list, not
to just anyone subscribed to it?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 9:28 PM
To: general
All,
Suppose the Tapestry TLP project creates a new subproject called Tapestry
Commons. Then, I want to add some code that I've developed outside of the
ASF to the Tapestry Commons subproject. Does that code have to go through
the incubator? My guess is that it does so that we avoid
How about ErroRat, a play on Ararat?
On 10/24/07, Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like plain rat, and since rat is common word I doubt we have to
worry about trademark violations. I also don't confuse it with any
other projects in the java space.. so I think it's ok.
On 10/23/07,
I guess the big point here is what is the big issue with changing the
package name in the code? When people see a class that's in an
org.apache.*package, they assume that it's from the ASF. Leaving it
in an
ASF-namespaced package has two problems here:
1. People will assume that it's ASF code.
On 1/23/08, Richard S. Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Carman wrote:
I guess the big point here is what is the big issue with changing the
package name in the code? When people see a class that's in an
org.apache.*package, they assume that it's from the ASF. Leaving it
in an
ASF
At that point, aren't you just testing that the ORM implementation
works? Wouldn't it be better to make unit tests that test the
values of the annotations at runtime? Stuff like:
1. Make sure class X has the @Entity annotation.
2. Make sure its id property has the @Id annotation.
3. Make
.
JEUT is compatible all db server, the framework will use the
META-INF/persistence.xml defined in the test source folder in the
application of the user. So the user can test with the oracle db, hsqldb,
derby, mysql,...
It's not easy to explain!
Is it more clear?
Alexis
2008/5/16, James
Willemyns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, with the solution of hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto=validate, you don't need
to write a unit test? If it's the case, the JEUT framework doesn't have any
sense. I will test this solution!
2008/5/16, James Carman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This sort of thing should
. Is there an equivalent for Toplink of
Oracle?
2008/5/16, James Carman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well, one of our unit tests is called TestTargetDatabaseSchema and in
that test I do:
@Test
public void verifySchema()
{
SchemaValidator validator = new SchemaValidator(getConfiguration
Isn't there something that states that an incubating project needs to
be novel or provide something that's not already provided by another
library (with an open-source license)? I have looked at the JSecurity
proposal only briefly, but it seems to me that most of what it aims to
provide is
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Jeremy Haile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another differentiator is that JSecurity provides a session framework
that is not limited to being shared across just web-based applications.
We have users that share sessions across multiple environments, such as
Swing
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in terms of communication, the pom is the place to focus. AIUI maven
users choose to use a library by adding a dependency with artifact and
group IDs. an easy and effective way to ensure that users know that
they
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maven artifacts can also specify a classifier. Perhaps the
incubating part could be a classifier?
Only attached artifacts can have a classifier, not the main one, so
unfortunately this won't work. I think having a
Well, to avoid collisions like that you could change the package name:
org.apache.incubating.podlingname
Once it graduates, you get:
org.apache.podlingname
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with that is when the project graduates and they
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You would still end up with duplicate jars being drawn in. Maven
fingerprints an artifact with groupId:artifactid:classifier:type to see
if there are conflicts.
Of course, but you can make sure folks aren't using the
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
End users don't read the POM. They just use it. So that is no solution at
all. The signing approach would be, IMO, a reasonable solution. It would
solve Les' issue -- users would simply have to agree to install the
The bottom line is that incubator projects haven't (yet) gone through
all the hoops necessary to become official ASF projects. So, if they
are published to the main repository, that is in a way saying that the
ASF endorses the software. Since it has not graduated from the
incubator, the ASF
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Jeremy Haile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it seems that a valid question is whether or not publishing to one
repository or another indicates an endorsement.
Yes, that's certainly a valid question. Again, that's just my
personal point of view.
The biggest
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's no uniqueness requirement AFAIK. Any kind of project can be
proposed even if there already exist multiple implementations of a similar
technology here at the ASF and abroad.
Perhaps the uniqueness/novel
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maven vs Ant vs Buildr ?
Who uses Ant or Buildr? ;)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
an
org.apache.incubator.projectname group id to maintain
convention/simplicity.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:38 AM, James Carman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Jeremy Haile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it seems that a valid question is whether or not publishing to one
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Janne Jalkanen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As an end user, I would _hate_ to have to change all of my code to
reference a totally new package structure after the podling graduates.
That's a major pain...
With JSPWiki we have plenty of plugins and other
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:33 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO this isn't really a maven issue: basic checks should be performed
on all releases. i favour a private subversion repository with custom
hooks for release publishing.
I think it very much is a maven issue.
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 9:05 AM, James Carman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:33 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO this isn't really a maven issue: basic checks should be performed
on all releases. i favour a private subversion repository with custom
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, I agree with James that we would use signing to be more fine-grained,
but didn't want to go into that degree of detail in the earlier discussion.
I apologize for being so verbose. This is probably not the correct
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:52 AM, sebb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/06/2008, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Incubator releases go into Central
+1
I think having the incubator or incubating word
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Brian E. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Part of the Incubation process is to ensure that there is sufficient
community to maintain the code after incubation.
It seems a bad idea to allow artefacts into the main repository where
they can become dependencies unless
+1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Relevant information can be found in:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/JSecurityProposal
Regards,
Alan
-
To unsubscribe,
So, does this photo gallery software currently exist or are you trying
to start a new project?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have started some discussions on getting a prototype based on
Tuscany + Sling [1].
The code will be available at [2]
[1]
Ok, so we're talking about incubating an idea, then?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o, does this photo gallery software currently exist or are you trying
to start a new project?
There are several codebases (Angie's, mine, and others), but basically,
If it's a new project, then why does it have to be incubated?
Couldn't we just start up a labs project to tinker around with the
idea. Then, when/if it builds up enough steam, promote it to a TLP?
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o, does this photo
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Angela Cymbalak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't labs for something already inside of Apache and the Incubator for
things outside of Apache?
labs is for existing Apache committers, and
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As bertrand mentioned, Labs are for existing committers only, and
Angela, who is proposing the project isn't a committer.
Sorry, I saw Noel's comment about there being many codebases and
thought he was party proposing
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
since currently this software project is merely an idea (along
with some previously tinkered with codebases), I'd say it's a
perfect candidate for a lab. It doesn't sound like it's ready
for a release just yet. :)
When
Doesn't requiring a library with an excluded license pretty much throw
the apache license part out the window? Are these optional
dependencies? Will couchdb run at all without them?
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 9, 2008, at 9:37 AM, Philippe
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Santiago Gala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El mié, 09-07-2008 a las 12:41 -0400, James Carman escribió:
Doesn't requiring a library with an excluded license pretty much throw
the apache license part out the window? Are these optional
dependencies? Will couchdb run
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, AFAIK, CPAN doesn't allow every CPAN author to overwrite the files
of every other CPAN author. Thats the situation we are in now with the
Maven Repository, because we just use the filesystem on people.apache.org as
How about phoshow? Photo/Show :)
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jukka Zitting wrote:
I also think the names are too similar
I have re-opened the naming discussion on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Should we keep this vote running, or should we start a
new one
Oops. Sorry:
http://whatstoeatla.blogspot.com/2008/06/phoshowi-swear-i-didnt-make-it-up.html
I was half kidding. I think phoshizzle is out too :(
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:16 PM, James Carman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about phoshow? Photo/Show :)
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Eclipse does something like this, doesn't it? When you install a
plugin, it asks you to accept the license terms for all the stuff
that's being imported. Couldn't maven do something similar?
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only reason I suggested
No longer any known fluent speakers
Perhaps we should have a COBOL implementation, then. :)
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way, I forgot to mention that Jawi has everything to do with Java (the
Island... @ Malaysia).
Quoting Wikipedia
+1 (non-binding)
I've informed the Wicket team about this incubator request and there
is interest in providing a wicket-based implementation (wicket along
with differing ORM technologies of course, like JPA and Hibernate; the
way I envision it, we'll use profiles in maven to turn on/off
different
I think incubating projects should go through phases. The first
phase is to make sure all IP concerns are cleared up. The second
phase is where the project exhibits that it gets the Apache way of
doing business by doing some internal-only releases (this is where
package names would change and
into the structure of Olio. And if it
isn't clear, file a JIRA. ;-)
Thanks,
Craig
On Sep 23, 2008, at 5:01 PM, James Carman wrote:
+1 (non-binding)
I've informed the Wicket team about this incubator request and there
is interest in providing a wicket-based implementation (wicket along
with differing ORM
Do I have to actually be an Apache Member to join the Incubator PMC?
I'm not currently an ASF member, but I'm interested in helping out
with the incubator.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
and responding to the general at incubator list.
Craig
On Sep 29, 2008, at 8:57 AM, James Carman wrote:
Do I have to actually be an Apache Member to join the Incubator PMC?
I'm not currently an ASF member, but I'm interested in helping out
with the incubator
A non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is required to be an apache
committer? Since when?
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 4:48 AM, Matthias Wessendorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How to get or sign this NDA to view current draft spec? Is
I'd vote +1 (non-binding) for it. I'd love to be involved no matter
where the project lives.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi;
I am planning to start a vote process again at next monday.
Are there still any concerns about the proposal ? Do you
+1 (non-binding)
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi;
Incubator PMC, this is the repetition for the [VOTE] process for the
OpenWebBeans proposal. If acceptable, please vote on the proposal until 27
Oct.
PS : The following fellows voted positively
No worries. It's non-binding anyway. :)
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 5:51 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey James;
Sorry for forgetting to add your vote sending before into the list
Thanks for re-vote;
Gurkan Erdogdu
2008/10/20 James Carman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 (non
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Gavin ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:robertburrelldon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 3 February 2009 8:25 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposed use of org.apache.wiki name space
Don't you usually need 3 +1 binding votes to do a release?
On Mar 19, 2009 1:54 PM, James Dixson dixs...@gmail.com wrote:
So far we are at +2
If we do not get anymore votes before Monday (23-Mar), I would like to go
ahead and declare victory and move forward with the release.
--
james
On Mar
Actually, the 3 vote minimum is required. If you look here:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
It says the 'minimum of three +1 votes' rule is universal.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:41 PM, James Carman wrote
I wouldn't recommend using these tools for your community discussions, though.
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Luciano Resendeluckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Angela Cymbalaka.cymba...@nechtan.org wrote:
I've been spending more than my fair share of time on Facebook
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Martijn
Dashorstmartijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there something for projects to cherrypick/scavenge? E.g. some code
that can be merged into Tomcat, commons, or any of the web frameworks
that are around? Is this something we could send to all PMCs for any
I meant biological object model project. Sorry.
-Original Message-
From: James Carman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:35 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Biological Object Model Project
All,
I would like to start a biological object model
the JavaDocs and I could be very wrong.
-Original Message-
From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 2:10 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Biological Object Model Project
Hi,
James Carman wrote:
I would like to start a biological object model
-06-07 at 18:35 -0400, James Carman wrote:
All,
I would like to start a biological object model process (I need to come up
with a catchier name) and I think ASF would be a great place for it. I
currently work with a product called GKP (Genomics Knowledge Platform)
from
a company called
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: James Carman
Subject: Re: Biological Object Model Project
On Thursday 09 June 2005 08:12, James Carman wrote:
I was really just wanting to
figure out if ASF would be willing to host a project such as this one.
Unfortunately, ASF does not really operate like
So, does that mean that Jakarta Commons Proxy will have to go through the
Incubator? Right now, it's a commons sandbox project, so it's not
officially supported. The code first lived in my syringe project I
created over at java.net. It was all developed by me under the Apache
License 2.0. Will
Sorry to have hijacked another thread for this discussion, but the contents
of that thread brought about the question. Anyway, here's the situation.
1. I developed all of the code myself while trying to come up with
ideas of how we could redesign Jakarta HiveMind to make it lend itself
James Carman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry to have hijacked another thread for this discussion, but the
contents of that thread brought about the question. Anyway, here's the
situation.
1.I developed all of the code myself while trying to come up with
ideas of how we could redesign
...
--On September 7, 2005 11:16:37 PM -0400 James Carman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where do I fax the form? There are no instructions on it.
Hmm. Good point.
You fax it to the same number as the CLAs, which says:
If you have not already done so, please complete and send an
original
Why not do like we do with the commons?
spec-javamail
-Original Message-
From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 9:08 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Starting a java specs project
On 12/27/05, Hiram Chirino
I think that introducing ontology into the mailing lists would be a good
idea. It'd be nice to know, for instance, that there is an O/R mapping
project (or two as it seems: JPA and Cayenne) being added to the incubator
if I'm an Apache DB committer.
-Original Message-
From: Noel J.
The foundation doesn't require CCLAs (they're a good CYA for the employees
though) but we do require ICLAs.
On Sunday, February 8, 2015, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote:
All,
Just wanted to confirm with others. If a company is donating a new project
to the ASF, a CCLA (or multiple
are trying to move
TinkerPop forward and how exactly we go about getting the forms filled
out properly is somewhat of a blocker.
Thanks,
James Carman, Assistant Secretary
Apache Software Foundation
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general
Are there guidelines for these usual considerations?
On Saturday, January 31, 2015, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:44 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com javascript:; wrote:
Is there a standard within the incubator about how we go about
to the ASF.
James
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
We need to make sure we get these guidelines nailed down, because that is
not the advice we got when doing Tinker
Emmanuel,
I apologize for hijacking your thread. Let me part (and create a new
thread) by saying Welcome, Groovy!
James
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:45 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Bertrand,
It took me a second, but I think I found some threads of interest:
https://mail
, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:54 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Emmanuel,
I apologize for hijacking your thread. Let me part (and create a new
thread) by saying Welcome, Groovy!
James
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:45 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Bertrand
We need to make sure we get these guidelines nailed down, because that is
not the advice we got when doing Tinker pop. Just seems like a very
similar situation. No one entity owns groovy. This is also a very likely
situation for us to encounter in the future, especially since two of the
major
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
My view is that
-All committers need an iCLA
I think that we can agree upon and nobody is refuting that.
-Software that comes from outside the ASF needs to come with a software grant
This is the sticking
I really have no opinion on the matter (IANAL). I'm just a virtual
paper pusher, but I did want to have a clear understanding of the
requirements so that when folks ask us on secretary@, we can guide
them to the right place or give them the right advice.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:43 AM,
And that covers us from a legal standpoint? Is there anything
special' about this situation that makes this appropriate?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
There is no official, legal entity which can make the actual
transfer. When we created the ASF, out
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Marvin Humphrey
mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
If you have a codebase which was not previously under the ALv2 -- say it was
either proprietary or available under a different open source license -- then
the Software Grant is hugely important from a legal
+1
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:09 PM Henry Saputra henry.sapu...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 (binding)
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
Following the discussion earlier in the thread:
http://s.apache.org/Oxt
I would like to call a VOTE for accepting
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:47 PM Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net Anyone
who is so inclined is welcome to edit the proposal directly.
No urgency or timeframe in mind (other than preferably starting sometime
in 2015ish). My current thinking is to follow in Steve's footprints and
go directly to
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
