- Original message
From: Danny Angus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 22:58:55 +
Subject: RE: Indemnification of the PMC
Seems to me that part of the reason it is difficult to resolve the
-PROPOSITION (1)-
* Require all Jakarta products (or subprojects) to file regular reports
with the PMC.
You mean 'make each subproject work like a TLP' don't you?
Since the PMC cannot delegate its responsibilities, the report would
have to be prepared by a PMC member, ideally one directly
There has been considerable emphasis on this list over recent weeks for the
sticking plaster approach. That is to make small minor changes to Jakarta in
the hope the board will stop hassling us. This could be because this is the
consensus view and I'm an odd one out. Or it could be that those in
On Dec 28, 2003, at 9:39 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
There has been considerable emphasis on this list over recent weeks
for the
sticking plaster approach. That is to make small minor changes to
Jakarta in
the hope the board will stop hassling us.
The board isn't hassling. They have valid
On Dec 28, 2003, at 8:43 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
* We need to put *all* the decision-markers on the PMC. At Jakarta,
that means *all* the committers, and
No, it doesn't. We need to put as many as possible, hopefully all, but
it's not required to be all. We can also have people that aren't
+1
I agree that interested volunteers should:
* setup a Wiki area describing the TLP process and rationales , AND
* give notice to each and every Jakarta DEV list that the area exists.
My main beef is that we have not done due diligence in alerting ALL of the subprojects
of the latest
-PROPOSITION (1)-
* Require all Jakarta products (or subprojects) to file regular reports
with the PMC.
You mean 'make each subproject work like a TLP' don't you?
Since the PMC cannot delegate its responsibilities, the report would
have to be prepared by a PMC member, ideally one directly
- Original message
From: Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 14:16:26 +
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] As it ever were (draft 2)
Since the PMC cannot delegate its responsibilities,
Geir,
I agree with everything that you said, except one. You have the idea that
when a project moves to TLP status it leaves Jakarta, and that saddens you.
You said the same thing when Logging was promoted, and Ceki tried to
reassure you that it wasn't going far.
Although I concur that projects
On Dec 28, 2003, at 10:50 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Geir,
I agree with everything that you said, except one. You have the idea
that
when a project moves to TLP status it leaves Jakarta, and that saddens
you.
In the above sentence, there is one correct statement :
.. when a project moves to
On Dec 28, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
+1
I agree that interested volunteers should:
* setup a Wiki area describing the TLP process and rationales , AND
Do you think we all should setup our own individual Wiki page, or work
together? I'm getting the feeling you don't want to work
I have added to the wiki
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPMCTopLevelProjectAppli
cation a section on board meeting dates (Jan 21st according to the
archives). (If anyone knows a better source, or more dates, please update
the wiki).
Any suggestions of someone who could comment
On Dec 28, 2003, at 8:43 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
* We need to put *all* the decision-markers on the PMC. At Jakarta,
that means *all* the committers, and
No, it doesn't. We need to put as many as possible, hopefully all, but
it's not required to be all. We can also have people that aren't
On Dec 28, 2003, at 10:48 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
- Original message
From: Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 14:16:26 +
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] As it ever were (draft 2)
Since
On Dec 28, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
+1
I agree that interested volunteers should:
* setup a Wiki area describing the TLP process and rationales , AND
Do you think we all should setup our own individual Wiki page, or work
together? I'm getting the feeling you don't want to work
Is it my mailer that's making a mess here, or is something else going
on? This is the second message I've seen today that is attributed to
Ted but was written by someone else (in this case me, in the previous
case Stephen)
geir
On Dec 28, 2003, at 11:13 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
On Dec 28,
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What really saddens me is the idea of chasing them out the door.
To use an analogy, its like being the parents of a family, where the
children, aged from 4 to 40, are all living at home. It strikes me that it
isn't healthy for that 40 year old to be
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Is it my mailer that's making a mess here, or is something else going
on? This is the second message I've seen today that is attributed to
Ted but was written by someone else (in this case me, in the previous
case Stephen)
The two messages from Ted Husted that
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Is it my mailer that's making a mess here, or is something else going
on? This is the second message I've seen today that is attributed to
Ted but was written by someone else (in this case me, in the previous
case Stephen)
The two messages from Ted Husted that concern you
- Original message
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:11:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status
On Dec 28, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
Mea culpa.
I'm trying a new mail client and managed to press the wrong buttons. Sorry for the
confusion.
-Ted.
- Original message
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003
On Dec 28, 2003, at 11:26 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What really saddens me is the idea of chasing them out the door.
To use an analogy, its like being the parents of a family, where the
children, aged from 4 to 40, are all living at home. It strikes
No worries. I was just truly baffled.
geir
On Dec 28, 2003, at 11:59 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
Mea culpa.
I'm trying a new mail client and managed to press the wrong buttons.
Sorry for the confusion.
-Ted.
- Original message
From: Geir Magnusson Jr.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
it's good to see projects come out of Jakarta and continue
to grow, and it's sad to see them leave, like when leaving
a friend after a visit.
I understand. And I understand why you view Jakarta that way. Why do you
not feel that Jakarta could be an active community
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What really saddens me is the idea of chasing them out the door.
To use an analogy, its like being the parents of a family, where the
children, aged from 4 to 40, are all living at home. It strikes me that it
isn't healthy for
I think I missed the VOTE thread where this proposal has been approved.
So far I've seen 2 +1 and 2 -1 votes ( including mine ), this doesn't
seem like a consensus. It's better to wait for the vote to finish ( and
it would be nice to have a [VOTE] thread and a time limit ) before
starting to do
On Dec 27, 2003, at 7:39 PM, Santiago Gala wrote:
Scalable because big groups of people can coordinate, even if they
don't give specific input or they were not there while the decision
was taken.
OT: after some light holiday-time reading (Prey from Michael Crichton
-
Costin Manolache wrote:
I see jakarta more like a union ( EU-style ), were the different
projects that joined are mature entities that choose to be part
of jakarta ( and can choose to get out - all that's needed is a
vote ). And the PMC role is to make sure the rules are respected
Project
-1
I don't think the PMC should be doing anything other than encouraging sub-projects to
*consider* TLP at this stage.
The proposal contains a number of detailed actions most of which I'd wholeheartedly
support as they will help sub-projects to consider pro's and con's of promotion.
However
On Dec 28, 2003, at 1:42 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
it's good to see projects come out of Jakarta and continue
to grow, and it's sad to see them leave, like when leaving
a friend after a visit.
I understand. And I understand why you view Jakarta that way. Why do
you
On Dec 28, 2003, at 3:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
I see jakarta more like a union ( EU-style ), were the different
projects that joined are mature entities that choose to be part
of jakarta ( and can choose to get out - all that's needed is a
vote ). And the PMC role is
On Dec 28, 2003, at 3:49 PM, Danny Angus wrote:
-1
I don't think the PMC should be doing anything other than encouraging
sub-projects to *consider* TLP at this stage.
I don't even think they should do that. I don't think the PMC should
take a position either way. I don't think there should
Firstly, having details collected together in one place for 'how to become a
TLP' is a good thing IMHO. I doubt you are asking us to deny information to
subprojects, are you?
Secondly, I am acting because I have been the responsibility to act. As a
Jakarta PMC member I have direct responsibility
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think a lot of what you say presupposed some sort of onerous
additional work that comes from being a part of the Jakarta PMC. I
would argue that it's no different - if you are providing oversight
independently of Jakarta or part of Jakarta, it's
On Dec 28, 2003, at 4:44 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think a lot of what you say presupposed some sort of onerous
additional work that comes from being a part of the Jakarta PMC. I
would argue that it's no different - if you are providing oversight
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
you haven't seen what the EU has been up to :) Talk about
over-regulation...
LOL :-) OK, so it is a bad analogy. I don't believe that either Costin or
I live in the EU.
The PMC is supposed to be performing the active management of one or
more projects, not
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We need to get that view corrected, because there is *nothing* that
states that every member of the PMC is *directly* responsible for ever
part of every code, doc, mail list and CVS usage in Jakarta, the key
word is directly.
As a PMC member, I should
I'll try to be brief. I agree w/ you - I don't want to have to watch
ever project. I'm also not interested in endless debate. I'm also not
interested in legislation, process or overbearing procedure. And I'm
not interested in breaking up Jakarta. All I want to do is get CLAs
signed and
The resolution to approve a 2.0.8 maintenance release of jakarta-oro
has passed with 4 binding +1 votes from Jakarta PMC members and no -1
votes. Many thanks to all who voted. I will now proceed to package and
upload a release for distribution, update appropriate Web pages, and
email an
Ted:
First off - appologies because I havn't read every message on
Jakarta. But it seems to me that someone has said that the
very notion of federation employed by the board to facilitate
management (i.e. the establishment of sub-structures) is for
some reason not-allowed beyond the level of the
On Dec 28, 2003, at 7:51 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Ted:
First off - appologies because I havn't read every message on
Jakarta. But it seems to me that someone has said that the
very notion of federation employed by the board to facilitate
management (i.e. the establishment of sub-structures)
On Dec 28, 2003, at 6:05 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
you haven't seen what the EU has been up to :) Talk about
over-regulation...
LOL :-) OK, so it is a bad analogy. I don't believe that either
Costin or
I live in the EU.
I don't either. I live in Connecticut, USA.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Dec 28, 2003, at 7:51 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Ted:
First off - appologies because I havn't read every message on
Jakarta. But it seems to me that someone has said that the
very notion of federation employed by the board to facilitate
management (i.e. the
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
You also can't get soft cheese at a reasonable temperature in a
restaurant under EU regs. They must keep them cold until being
served. Ug.
I can help you out on this particular subject!
No shortage of soft cheese ready for a stated day of delivery where live.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
You also can't get soft cheese at a reasonable temperature in a
restaurant under EU regs. They must keep them cold until being
served. Ug.
I can help you out on this particular subject!
No shortage of soft cheese ready for a stated
you haven't seen what the EU has been up to :) Talk about
over-regulation...
LOL :-) OK, so it is a bad analogy. I don't believe that either
Costin or
I live in the EU.
I don't either. I live in Connecticut, USA.
I was always suspicious that something was amiss trying to
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
you haven't seen what the EU has been up to :) Talk about
over-regulation...
LOL :-) OK, so it is a bad analogy. I don't believe that either
Costin or
I live in the EU.
I don't either. I live in Connecticut, USA.
I was always suspicious that
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 02:45:18 +0100
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Perhaps the parallel is that a Struts 'citizen' identifies more with the
Struts 'country' than the Jakarta 'union'. Of course one key difference is
that we don't have the individual governments at the country/Struts level.
+100
dfs 2003/12/28 20:32:37
Modified:xdocs/site binindex.xml sourceindex.xml
docs/site binindex.html sourceindex.html
Log:
Updated ORO release links to version 2.0.8 and added KEYS file nad PGP signature
links.
Revision ChangesPath
1.330 +8 -8
-1
My knee jerk reaction to Proactively encourage TLP status is the same
as I had to one of my conservative friend who set out to
convert a family of another religion to their true religion. That is
repugnant to me, and so is Proactively encourage TLP status
If you want to make the information
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We see a couple of things differently. For one, you don't seem to believe
that a community can be built by multiple collaborating PMCs.
I don't believe that the Apache vs Jakarta Commons analogy applies. AFAICS,
Apache Commons was an idea
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
This could be interesting, Henri. If we had an formal description of a
project, providing its name, resource (www, scm, wiki, etc.) locations,
ontological classifications, etc., I imagine that
Agreed on the -1 for the proposal's subject line, yet +1 to Stephen's
suggestions of preparing Wiki resources for Jakarta sub-projects that want
to move to TLP-ness.
I do plan to proactively encourage TLP status for Commons, but as a
Commons committer. As a Taglibs committer I'm happy where it
53 matches
Mail list logo
