Sorry, wrong mailing list s/community/commons/
Jan
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Rob Tompkins [mailto:chtom...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 4. April 2019 03:06
> An: dev@community.apache.org
> Betreff: [lang] Towards 3.9
>
> Any thoughts on doing a 3.9 release of [lang]. I
Hi Fouad,
You may find your answer in the followng link:
https://github.com/openMF/mifosx/wiki/MySQL-Database-Setup
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:10 PM Fouad KHATTALA
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Can i change default mySQL user mifos in local.properties in mifos 2.6.0
> (Ubuntu)
>
>
>
>
Any thoughts on doing a 3.9 release of [lang]. I think Benedikt want’s us to go
up with what we have. Any thoughts for or against doing a release?
-Rob
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For
Ah, ok - thanks!
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019, 1:43 PM Sharan Foga wrote:
> Hi Gris
>
> I've already sent the email to withdraw the ASF application that I
> created. If you think there is specific work that could be useful then
> there is no reason that another application could be made before the
>
Hi All
Initially the ASF as an organisation was planning to apply as a
mentoring organisation for Google Season of Docs on behalf of all Apache
projects but if accepted the maximum number of technical writers we
could allocated is two. Two technical writers would probably not be
enough to
Hi Gris
I've already sent the email to withdraw the ASF application that I created. If
you think there is specific work that could be useful then there is no reason
that another application could be made before the deadline.
Thanks
Sharan
On 2019/04/03 20:37:51, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
Hi Sharan & Joan,
I think we could have the tech writer help with overall content of the ASF,
specially as we talk about how to best represent "meritocracy". *I can help
scope the project.* My initial thoughts are that the concrete internship
could be an ASF-wide content refresh with the focus of
Hi Joan
We would need to specify the exact piece of work that the tech writer will work
on. So it's not a generic application. The tech writer will look at the
prospective work and choose what they think they would like to do. So I think
at this stage it makes sense to let the projects apply
Sharan, might want to keep the ASF application if we want their help
with tech doc writing for things like the incubator, infra, etc. and
other internally-facing ASF stuff. Not sure it makes sense for those
groups to be individually reaching out on those topics.
-Joan
- Original Message
Agreed.
I'll ask them to delete the ASF application for Season of Docs and each Apache
project can apply for themselves. I'll check the email thread for those
projects interested and send a message to their dev list.
Thanks
Sharan
On 2019/04/03 15:29:59, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
> In such
Thanks Dinesh - that's pretty clear then.
Thanks
Sharan
On 2019/04/03 15:24:06, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> I heard back. Here’s the exact response -
>
> “I believe the ASF has already applied. However, we are not setup to handle
> multiple applications through an umbrella organization, so yes,
In such case I see no need in ASF wide org admins
"it's every man for himself." (c)
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 at 22:24, Dinesh Joshi
wrote:
>
> I heard back. Here’s the exact response -
>
> “I believe the ASF has already applied. However, we are not setup to handle
> multiple applications through
I heard back. Here’s the exact response -
“I believe the ASF has already applied. However, we are not setup to handle
multiple applications through an umbrella organization, so yes, you may want to
have Apache Cassandra apply separately.”
Thanks,
Dinesh
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:39 PM, Sharan
[moving comdev back to bcc]
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:06 AM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > On Apr 3, 2019, at 8:59 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:57 AM Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >>
> >> Consider the effort along the lines of development... all development
> >> needs to be done on
> On Apr 3, 2019, at 9:26 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
>
>
> as you are not the person driving the call, I don't think it is
> particularly important that you don't see a rationale. our concern should
> not be *how* people "should" work, but that people *can* work, and in ways
> that suit them.
I was being polite. whether or not you personally think a call is a good
idea is not important in the context of other people wanting to do a call.
and pointing that out is conducive to good community building. it is not
demeaning or dismissive. throwing your weight around on the list to
bikeshed
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 at 15:03, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Personally, I think the right course would be to take the advice
> that having a call when not specifically required to heart and to,
> instead, do all discussion, agenda setting, etc on the diversity@
> list and drop the idea of having a call
> On Apr 3, 2019, at 8:59 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:57 AM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> Consider the effort along the lines of development... all development
>> needs to be done on list.
>
> Not all committees operate along the lines of development.
> Independent of
My last words on the subject:
> On Apr 3, 2019, at 8:46 AM, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> It seems that the right course of action would be to prepare an agenda,
> distribute it in the divers...@apache.org list and gather input from folks
> who can't join.
Personally, I think the right course
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:57 AM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Consider the effort along the lines of development... all development
> needs to be done on list.
Not all committees operate along the lines of development.
Independent of that, we often complement lists with calls, meetups,
hackathons,
Thanks everyone, as I mentioned before my experience in the Apache Way
continues to grow, so I appreciate everyone's input and guidance, this felt
very much like a good mentorship process.
It all makes sense and I want to do this the right way.
It seems that the right course of action would be
Consider the effort along the lines of development... all development
needs to be done on list.
I think (I could be wrong) Sam's suggestion regarding a call
was to discuss options on the effort (eg: president's cmmt, etc...)
and not about the actual "details" of the ins and outs.
Discussing the
Naomi Slater wrote on 4/3/19 6:06 AM:
...snip...
>... but I am "interested in being part of the
> committee and shaping the request
> to the board"
People can now show their interest and bring their volunteer time to
work on this idea to the newly created mailing list:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 22:27, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Can I recommend instead of a call, using the newly created
> mailing list... In general, Apache tries to avoid the use of
> sync communication medium except when absolutely required.
>
> I think that esp for such a topic as D, starting the
I would say this is not unsolicited nor bulk, so it is not the same issue.
He wrote to the advertised place about Apache Beam. It might be slightly
off-topic.
To me,.this sample is much better than if he scrapped the list and mailed
everyone who had posted privately. That is what the other
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 4:49 AM William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> ...there was no "accepted"
> framework for async electronic meetings at the time the foundation was
> created
I often describe the Board meeting as a hybrid, with LOTS of async
preparation before the meeting followed by a fairly short
26 matches
Mail list logo
