i've had time to take a brief look at the mailing lists and IMHO this
matter needs to be taken private (and i started the balls rolling for
that). i will issue a formal veto with both IPMC and legal hats on in
due course. i just wanted to know that i'm going to unsubscribe this
email address from
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote:
i've had time to take a brief look at the mailing lists and IMHO this
matter needs to be taken private (and i started the balls rolling for
that). i will issue a formal veto with both IPMC and legal
Hi Anne,
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe
yoji...@gmail.com wrote:
...I hope this issue will resolve itself quickly so that we hopefully can get
back on track
Now that Robert has withdrawn his veto (see [VETO] Emse veto
invalid), feel free to tally this vote once
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
...I suggest you review the thread that was provided and then see if you
want to reconsider your veto
As this vote is not
Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just
express your disagreement with the majority?
I might be thick or gmail buggy, but where is Gianugo's -1 ? I can't find it...
Regards
Santiago
-
To
Check his email from Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:06 PM
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Santiago Gala santiago.g...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just
express your disagreement with the majority?
I might be thick or gmail buggy, but where is
Definitely a case of buggy gmail/our list software, it is not here...
I'm loosing more and more emails messages without any warning, and I'd
like to know if it is trouble in our infrastructure or in gmail.
Anybody knows?
Regards
Santiago
2010/1/20 Richard Hirsch hirsch.d...@gmail.com:
Check
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Santiago Gala santiago.g...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just
express your disagreement with the majority?
I might be thick or gmail buggy, but where is Gianugo's -1 ? I can't find
it...
It's on esme-dev
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Santiago Gala santiago.g...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just
express your disagreement with the majority?
I might be thick or gmail buggy, but where is Gianugo's -1 ? I can't find
it...
I just replied to
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Gianugo Rabellino gian...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Santiago Gala santiago.g...@gmail.com
wrote:
Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just
express your disagreement with the majority?
I might be thick or
Let me be clear too, I'm not trying to mess with the vote in any way,
just wondering if my email account was going nuts, as I've seen a
couple of gmail hiccups in the last days and was over-sensitive... :)
2010/1/20 Gianugo Rabellino gian...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Gianugo
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
...I suggest you review the thread
(ccing both lists now..)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe
yoji...@gmail.com wrote:
PPMC and IPMC, please re-vote on the following regarding copyright issue
ESME-47.
+1 on what's suggested below (IPMC binding)
-Bertrand
1. The Apache license block will be added at
Not my day for multi-tasking apparently, sorry...
Apache ESME of course.
+1
On 19 Jan, 2010, at 12:25 , Richard Hirsch wrote:
The NOTICE should say Apache ESME instead of Apache Foo
+1
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
(ccing both
+1
Let's get this finalized and move on.
Dan
On Tue January 19 2010 6:17:16 am Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
(ccing both lists now..)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe
yoji...@gmail.com wrote:
PPMC and IPMC, please re-vote on the following regarding copyright
Robert,
We have already had a lengthy discussion on legal-discuss:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201001.mbox/thread
Look for the Committer refuses to remove copyright notices in source
(ESME-47),how best to solve? thread.
I am not sure if this is the same
+1
Daniel Kulp wrote:
+1
Let's get this finalized and move on.
Dan
On Tue January 19 2010 6:17:16 am Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
(ccing both lists now..)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe
yoji...@gmail.com wrote:
PPMC and IPMC, please re-vote on the following
On Jan 19, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe
yoji...@gmail.com wrote:
PPMC and IPMC, please re-vote on the following regarding copyright issue
ESME-47.
snip
2. The Apache License block will be followed by a legacy
+1
Craig
On Jan 19, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
This issue was discussed extensively on legal-discuss, this proposal
matches my understanding of the consensus opinion reached there.
Here's my +1 (IPMC binding)
--kevan
On Jan 19, 2010, at 6:17 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
...I suggest you review the thread that was provided and then see if you want
to reconsider your veto
As this vote is not about a technical issue, I don't think there are
vetos - we should have explicitely
20 matches
Mail list logo
