I mean that Google cleared it out that it donates the WIAB code along with the Wiki and logo to Apache. Is there anything else that should be cleared?
2011/8/19 Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > AFAIK the IP issues were cleared with WIAB. > > I am sorry - what does that exactly mean? > If they have been cleared, there is a need to check the status items > on the incubation status page > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/wave.html > > > > > > > 2011/8/19 Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com> > > > >> > Mercurial vs SVN > >> > Seems like SVN is viewed a legacy and a step back from Hg. > >> > >> I am not speaking for infrastructure of course, but I have heard this > >> dicussion for a while now. People always claim about SVN and want GIT. > >> Now you want Mercurial. All valid, but the usual answer from infra is: > >> not now. There are many problems with going to git, nobody has > >> mentioned hg yet. > >> At the moment there is git readonly support available: > >> http://git.apache.org/ > >> > >> > >> > Project Wiki / Site > >> > Currently using Google Sites which has a much richer CMS interface > which > >> handles images, html tables, sub pages, attachments. The Apache CMS is > >> functional, but is not on par with google sites. It also seems like it > is > >> not being maintained going forward due to lack of time. > >> > >> other projects use other options. Some use mvn site to create their > >> site. I think over at openoffice podling Drupal is now being used. You > >> are not limited to use this CMS, in fact only a few do. You should > >> just now that infra usually prefers static html in svn (or has done in > >> the past). The Drupal instance - to my knowledge - is not maintained > >> by asf infra, but they have helped to setup a vm for it. If this are > >> options, you can ask on the ooo dev list how they made it. > >> > >> besides that, sites generated with Apache Forrest or Piwi are also > >> possible. > >> > >> > Reviewboard vs Reitveld > >> > Many of the wave developers voiced an opinion that the strongly > preferred > >> Reitveld over reviewboard. > >> > > >> > So basically, as Yuri pointed out there have been some technical > issues > >> in doing the migration, but I think the larger issue is that we are > simply > >> not that motivated to do the migration because the end state looks less > >> desirable than the state we are in now. So it's been hard to get people > to > >> volunteer their time to move us over. I think some of these issues are > >> valid and we should discuss them. If we REALLY feel like these > >> infrastructure options are hampering the growth of the project then I > think > >> we should start a discussion with the Infra group at apache to raise our > >> concerns. > >> > >> > >> You should. I have been following wave for quite a while now and it > >> has become quiet. How many people are still -active- on Apache Wave? > >> How many have become silent because they were unhappy with the > >> environment? > >> > >> As I mentioned in another post, it looks like IP has not been cleared > >> for Wave yet. Or is it? > >> > >> For those who do not know, I am ASF member myself and active on the > >> incubator project. If can help a little bit please let me know. > >> > >> Cheers > >> Christian > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > If anyone would like to help in any regard, that would be great. > >> > > >> > ~Michael > >> > > >> > On Aug 19, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Yuri Z wrote: > >> > > >> >> Michael should be following this mail list, so I guess he will > respond > >> as > >> >> soon as he can. In any way his email is michael.macfad...@gmail.com. > >> >> Regarding the migration status: > >> >> Currently the issues migrated to Apache, however the source code is > >> still at > >> >> the old wave-protocol google-code based repository. > >> >> The code migration got a bit delayed for two reasons as I see it: > >> >> 1. The technical one. The technical aspect of converting Mercurial > >> >> repository into Subversion is kind of challenging. There are a plenty > of > >> >> tools that allow to do the transition the other way (from SVN to > >> Mercurial). > >> >> I personally investigated this a bit and seems like it would require > >> first > >> >> to convert Hg to Git, the Git to SVN. > >> >> 2. The convenience. Well, converting from mercurial to SVN is kind of > >> >> downgrade, so there's little emotional motivation to do it. > >> >> 3. The inertial. Currently we have working process to submit patches > >> with > >> >> tested tools and code review integration. Migration to SVN and the > >> Review > >> >> Board will have it's learning curve and honestly, possibly won't be > >> better. > >> >> > >> >> Also, we will probably have to move most of the Wiki that currently > >> resides > >> >> also on google-code, but that's less urgent. > >> >> > >> >> 2011/8/19 Andrew Ragone <ajr9...@rit.edu> > >> >> > >> >>> Ok good to know. Is there a way we can reach out to him? > >> >>> > >> >>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Matt Richards < > mricha...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> As far as I recall, I thought Michael MacFadden was taking the lead > on > >> >>>> infra > >> >>>> related items. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Andrew Ragone <ajr9...@rit.edu> > >> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> So the important questions are: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 1. Who is the most knowledgeable with the current state of the > >> project. > >> >>>>> 2. Who are the primary leaders of the group. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I wanna get the ball rolling on things again. We shouldn't just > sit > >> on > >> >>>>> the sidelines waiting for google or whoever to finish things. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -Andrew > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> On Aug 18, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Matt Richards <mricha...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> There was great momentum when Google was actively pushing the > >> >>>> incubation > >> >>>>>> status and active on the project as a whole. Now that Google has > >> >>>> tapered > >> >>>>> off > >> >>>>>> (as I assumed they would), I'm not sure what the status of things > >> are > >> >>>> any > >> >>>>>> more. Nor who has taken the rains of leading the movement toward > >> >>> being > >> >>>>> fully > >> >>>>>> on Apache's infra. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Zachary “Gamer_Z.” Yaro > >> >>>>>> <zmy...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> +1 What parts of the project are where right now? And how long > >> >>> will > >> >>>> it > >> >>>>> be > >> >>>>>>> until Apache has everything? > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> --Zachary “Gamer_Z.” Yaro > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 17:47, Matt Richards < > mricha...@gmail.com> > >> >>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> I've been kinda wondering the same thing. > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Andrew Ragone < > ajr9...@rit.edu> > >> >>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> It seems there is a huge lag in migration of the Project to > the > >> >>>>>>>> incubator. > >> >>>>>>>>> What is the status on this (eg. who has ownership of what) and > >> >>> what > >> >>>>> can > >> >>>>>>> I > >> >>>>>>>>> do > >> >>>>>>>>> to help migrate?! > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> -Andrew > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>>> --Matt > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>> --Matt > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -- > >> >>>> --Matt > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> http://www.grobmeier.de > >> > > > > > > -- > http://www.grobmeier.de >
