Good point, Thierry. The conversation has certainly taken a twist which
makes it now belong to dev@.
@All, let's continue there.
Thanks.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Rabuel, Thierry wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Despite the fact this subject is really interesting, could you please
> notice that you
IMHO SourceForge is a piece of crap that has never been anywhere near the
"good solution" ;) .
Cheers!
pt., 4.09.2015 o 15:22 użytkownik Victor NOËL
napisał:
> I arrive a bit late, but are we sure sourceforge is a good solution?
>
> After all the fuss about their terrible behaviour by implantin
Hi all,
Despite the fact this subject is really interesting, could you please
notice that you are on the USERS' mailing-list and not the DEVS' one ?
Best regards,
Thierry
2015-09-04 16:59 GMT+02:00 Rob Davies :
> The way I read it is comdev are doing a mass migration to SF - its
> understandab
The way I read it is comdev are doing a mass migration to SF - its
understandable they wouldn’t want multiple targets - so to pick one destination
for the code move makes sense. However its not clear that we have to keep
camel-extra at SF - or why we couldn’t just move it to GitHub ourselves ?
Victor and David: You are welcome to join the com-dev mailing list and
enlighten them.
Here is a link the latest answer on that question :-)
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201507.mbox/%3CBY2PR03MB490B6943E12F5D925203A2E99900%40BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E
//
Why not github?
4. sep. 2015 3:54 p.m. skrev "Victor NOËL" :
> Are they even aware of the problem with sourceforge?
> Maybe someone that is known there (such as a member of an Apache Project
> ;) could tell them before they take the wrong decision?
>
> It's even worse than what I thought because a
Are they even aware of the problem with sourceforge?
Maybe someone that is known there (such as a member of an Apache Project
;) could tell them before they take the wrong decision?
It's even worse than what I thought because after the Gimp people told
SF to stop doing their shady things, they
Quite frankly, SF would be my last resort. But the Apache Extras
repositories are governed by the ASF and the consensus seems to point to SF
rather than Github (which would have been my personal preference) or
Bitbucket.
Regards,
*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise A
I arrive a bit late, but are we sure sourceforge is a good solution?
After all the fuss about their terrible behaviour by implanting adware
and other spyware in installers available to download there.
It became known with the big complain of the Gimp project (that wasn't
even fixed by SourceFor
Do we not already have volunteers in the current set of contributors for
the project ?
I for one is willing in continue maintaining the project once it has been
moved (where ever it is moved).
I think the question right now is the progress of the SF migration.
// Pontus
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 09:
Hi,
As far as I know the Apache Extras projects are being moved to the...
SourceForge. So we need to find a volunteer willing to maintain the project
after SourceForge migration.
Cheers!
czw., 3.09.2015 o 20:38 użytkownik Pontus Ullgren
napisał:
> Have not seen any other updates on the comdev
Have not seen any other updates on the comdev mailing list no.
Perhaps we should reach out to Daniel Gruno (that seems to be in charge of
the move) to get a status update for camel-extra.
// Pontus
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 at 23:57 Raul Kripalani wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Do we have an update on the AS
Hey guys,
Do we have an update on the ASF front about the Apache Extras migration?
Users are asking for new releases of camel-extras components...
I quickly went through the ComDev thread but found no conclusion. Maybe I
overlooked an email in that thread. Things tend to get very chatty over
ther
>From this thread[1] it seems that Daniel Gruno is the one in charge for
the move.
However I fail to find any indication on the progress or roadmap.
Using Github as a backup plan does NOT[2] seem to be a option in the
opinion of the community-dev decision.
Anyway perhaps we should move this discus
Is there any date when this move is expected? We have still the backup plan
with Github in place, ...
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Pontus Ullgren wrote:
> Diging through the community development list shows that it will be moved
> to sourceforge along with the rest of the apache extra.
>
>
>
Diging through the community development list shows that it will be moved
to sourceforge along with the rest of the apache extra.
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/browser
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:12 Pontus Ullgren wrote:
>
> Yes this has been discussed on the d
Yes this has been discussed on the dev list[1][2] and the Apache community
development mailing list [2].
Unfortuantly there does not seem to be any conclusion on this discussion
yet.
// Pontus
[1]
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Moving-camel-extra-to-github-tt5764066.html
[2]
http://camel.4654
Now that the Google code site is about to switch to read only
(https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/) I wondered
what is going to happen to the Camel Extras stuff?
Tim
18 matches
Mail list logo
