On 1/13/12 4:00 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 12, 2012, at 6:18 PM, Ross Gardlerrgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 12 January 2012 19:01, Dave Fisherdave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry to top post.
A distinction exists between extensions.oo.o and
Got it - thanks Dave.
Ross
On 13 January 2012 03:00, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 12, 2012, at 6:18 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 12 January 2012 19:01, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry to top post.
A
Hi Ross,
sorry for my top posting.
I have only one point that is important for me. The hosting aspect of
binary extensions and templates is a very important part and we should
ensure can we can provide such a service in some way. And here it is not
important for our users if it is on Apache
2012/1/13 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
Hi Ross,
sorry for my top posting.
I have only one point that is important for me. The hosting aspect of binary
extensions and templates is a very important part and we should ensure can
we can provide such a service in some way.
Yes, I
On 1/13/12 12:32 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
2012/1/13 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com:
Hi Ross,
sorry for my top posting.
I have only one point that is important for me. The hosting aspect of binary
extensions and templates is a very important part and we should ensure can
we can
2012/1/13 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/13/12 12:32 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
..
My point was that in your email to the board this point was not clear enough
for me.
OK. The board are clear in this point. When they discussed the
infrastructure proposal Gav asked them to
I'm attempting to summarise this thread and thus I'm top-posting on
the orginal opening thread.
I will send the below text to the board for consideration. I'll
feedback here after the next board meeting (18th) or sooner if
possible.
Dear Board,
The Apache Open Office project needs to stabilise
Sorry to top post.
A distinction exists between extensions.oo.o and extensions.services.oo.o.
The first is part of the OOo-site and the second is the service.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 12, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
I'm attempting to
On 12 January 2012 19:01, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry to top post.
A distinction exists between extensions.oo.o and extensions.services.oo.o.
The first is part of the OOo-site and the second is the service.
Thanks Dave. Just so I'm absolutely clear does this change the
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 12, 2012, at 6:18 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 12 January 2012 19:01, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry to top post.
A distinction exists between extensions.oo.o and extensions.services.oo.o.
The first is part of the
On 04/01/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote:
2012/1/4 Jürgen Schmidt:
We should keep in mind that for many extension developers it's probably ok
to create a SF, GoogleCode or whatever project to host the extension code
and the binary. But i believe that there are also many developers who simply
want
On 1/5/12 2:57 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
2012/1/5 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
As a separate point in this thread I should also point out that the
ASF has some experience of dealing with off-site repository providers.
Not all of it good. Most of
is about, creating a
proposal for the board to consider and give us an indication as to
whether it would be acceptable or not.
Please keep your minds open. Starting from the assumption that the
extensions hosting *has* to move from the ASF is false and is closing
off one of the options available
On 6 January 2012 11:52, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 09:32, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
On 04/01/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote:
2012/1/4 Jürgen Schmidt:
...
Sounds good. The stabilization phase can be done anywhere, but as Rob wrote
if we
the repository with
the hosted extensions is the relevant service to our users, I think
that is what we should be concerned about.
Please keep your minds open. Starting from the assumption that the
extensions hosting *has* to move from the ASF is false and is closing
off one of the options
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 11:52, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 09:32, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
On 04/01/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote:
2012/1/4 Jürgen Schmidt:
...
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
...
I'm not saying you *will* be allowed to host them, I'm saying you
*may* be allowed to. Similarly, I'm asking you, and others, to stop
saying you
On 6 January 2012 15:35, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ross Gardler
...
As an IPMC member I would be concerned about a promise of breaking the
Sourceforge stranglehold on the extensions site for the reasons I
express above (ASF cannot benefit one
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:35, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ross Gardler
...
As an IPMC member I would be concerned about a promise of breaking the
Sourceforge stranglehold on
On 1/6/12 4:55 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:35, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ross Gardler
...
As an IPMC member I would be concerned about a promise of breaking the
Sourceforge stranglehold on the extensions site for the reasons I
On 6 January 2012 15:49, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
...
I'm not saying you *will* be allowed to host them, I'm saying you
*may* be allowed to.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:49, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
...
I'm
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:49, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
...
I'm not
On 6 January 2012 16:31, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January 2012 15:49, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 January
On 6 January 2012 17:24, Roberto Galoppini rgalopp...@geek.net wrote:
...
I want to take the chance here to say again we're not looking or
exclusivity, just offering to help. As I wrote earlier, we can state
it formally, providing the ASF and AOO with all necessary compliances
and
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 6, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 6, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Ross Gardler
+1
- short-medium term stabilise the extensions code and hosting
- long term move to a federated approach
I think this is indeed the growing consensus. I support moving forward
with SF in negotiating an approach that conforms to the boundaries you
describe below and lead us in this
On Jan 6, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
+1
- short-medium term stabilise the extensions code and hosting
- long term move to a federated approach
I think this is indeed the growing consensus. I support moving forward with
SF in negotiating an approach that conforms to the
Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 10:21
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Extensions hosting
On Jan 6, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Jan 6, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Extensions hosting
At some point it would be good to return to the use cases that are of concern
and what they represent:
1. There are extensions that are bundled in the setup that is delivered as
part of the install process for a binary release
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Jan 6, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
+1
- short-medium term stabilise the extensions code and hosting
- long term move to a federated approach
I think this is indeed the growing consensus. I support
On 1/4/12 7:32 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
snip
Once you've digested and debated the offer from Sourceforge the
community needs to come up with a couple of paragraphs indicating a
desired route forwards and reasons for
As a separate point in this thread I should also point out that the
ASF has some experience of dealing with off-site repository providers.
Not all of it good. Most of the problems have been a result of lack of
planning and lack of adequate protection of the trademarks involved.
All those cases
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
As a separate point in this thread I should also point out that the
ASF has some experience of dealing with off-site repository providers.
Not all of it good. Most of the problems have been a result of lack of
planning and lack of adequate protection of
2012/1/5 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
As a separate point in this thread I should also point out that the
ASF has some experience of dealing with off-site repository providers.
Not all of it good. Most of the problems have been a result of
On 5 January 2012 13:57, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
2012/1/5 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
...
And the proposed index only solution is not satisfying for me because of the
explained reasons (missing hosting of the binary extension
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 5 January 2012 13:57, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
2012/1/5 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
...
And the proposed index only solution is not satisfying
On Jan 5, 2012, at 8:05 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 5 January 2012 13:57, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
2012/1/5 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com:
On 1/5/12 12:12 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
...
And the proposed index only solution is not satisfying for me because of the
On 1/3/12 5:25 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
As the community know Gav, in his role at infrastructure@ has
undertaken to stabilise and migrate the AOO extensions code to ASF
infrastructure. His work has been progressing and
Hi *,
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:18:07AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We should keep in mind that for many extension developers it's
probably ok to create a SF, GoogleCode or whatever project to host
the extension code and the binary. But i believe that there are also
many developers who
-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, 5 January 2012 4:32 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Extensions hosting
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com
wrote:
snip
Once you've digested
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, 5 January 2012 4:32 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Extensions hosting
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross
On 4 January 2012 18:32, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
snip
Once you've digested and debated the offer from Sourceforge the
community needs to come up with a couple of paragraphs indicating a
desired route
As the community know Gav, in his role at infrastructure@ has
undertaken to stabilise and migrate the AOO extensions code to ASF
infrastructure. His work has been progressing and he remains committed
to completing this.
However, as some know Sourceforge made an offer to help via our
private list.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
As the community know Gav, in his role at infrastructure@ has
undertaken to stabilise and migrate the AOO extensions code to ASF
infrastructure. His work has been progressing and he remains committed
to completing
On 3 January 2012 16:25, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
As the community know Gav, in his role at infrastructure@ has
undertaken to stabilise and migrate the AOO extensions code to ASF
infrastructure. His work
46 matches
Mail list logo
