+1 (binding), thanks.
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 11:37 AM Craig Russell wrote:
> After this discussion
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/frwsy1g1pkx3ppbvzt538xxh9qo9y319
> I'd like to propose that we make the incubator. part of the URL optional
> for podlings.
>
> This is a way to minimize the
+1, thanks.
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 11:00 PM He Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am pleased to be calling this vote for the release of
> Apache Teaclave (incubating) 0.5.1 (release candidate 2).
>
> The Apache Teaclave (incubating) community has voted and approved the
> release. The result thread is
+1 (binding)
Thanks.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:33 PM He Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am pleased to be calling this vote for the fifth release of
> Apache Teaclave (incubating) 0.5.0 (release candidate 1).
> The Apache Teaclave (incubating) community has voted and approved the
> release, with five
+1 binding.
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 7:21 PM Sheng Wu wrote:
> +1 binding
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> Xinyu Zhou 于2023年2月22日周三 11:11写道：
> >
> > +1, Good luck.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 10:12 AM Xiaoqiao He
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1(binding).
> > >
> >
+1 for this idea.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:58 AM James Dailey
wrote:
> Thanks Rich.
>
> "The Open Quantum Safe (OQS) project is an open-source project that
> aims to support the development and prototyping of quantum-resistant
> cryptography."
>
> So, their concept is very different - it's
+1 (binding)
Congratulations!
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 6:50 PM Chao Zhang wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) from me. Good luck!
>
> Best regards
> Chao Zhang
>
> https://github.com/tokers
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 10:41 PM Joe Evans wrote:
> >
> > Hi Apache Incubator community,
> >
> > The Apache
+1 binding
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022, 9:22 PM Mingshen Sun wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Nice project, good luck!
>
> Mingshen
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 6:57 PM Goson zhang wrote:
> >
> > + 1 （non-binding）
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > XiaoYu 于2022年6月3日周五 08:38写道：
> >
> > > + 1 （non-binding）
> > >
>
There might be another option to consider which is git-lfs
https://git-lfs.github.com/
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 8:19 PM Mingshen Sun wrote:
> Hi community,
>
> We are facing an issue of storing some pre-built assets for CI usage.
>
> From what I understand, there are two places for hosting these
LGTM, +1 (binding), thanks.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 6:27 PM Mingshen Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We need more votes from IPMC for this release. Please kindly help to
> review this new release. Thanks!
>
> Mingshen
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 6:10 PM Zhaofeng Chen wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
>
LGTM, +1 (binding), Thanks
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 6:27 PM Mingshen Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We need more votes from IPMC for this release. Please kindly help to
> review this new release. Thanks!
>
> Mingshen
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 6:13 PM Zhaofeng Chen wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
>
It is verified from my side and looks good, +1 (binding), thanks.
On 2021/08/20 05:15:16 Mingshen Sun wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am pleased to be calling this vote for the third release of
> Apache Teaclave (incubating) 0.3.0 (release candidate 1).
>
> The Apache Teaclave (incubating) community has
Good question, though one I do not have as yet an answer for. However,
the classes used purely for the encoding/decoding in java are currently
about 150K unoptimised. They do also rely on Mina at present which is
278K. There would be a small amount on top of this most to tie this all
into a
Garrett Rooney wrote:
Finally, and I hate to say this because it may very well be just a
cultural difference between projects the Glasgow developers have
worked on and the way things work in ASF projects I'm familiar with, I
think it's disturbing that all answers to questions concerning this
Danny Angus wrote:
I think it is about time that we grew up and introduced a rule which
prevents words already used as proper nouns from being proposed as
project names unless there is some real and relevant on-topic
connection.
Just by way of explanation, this name was proposed as (a) it is
Brian McCallister wrote:
If the goal is to create a standard protocol for messaging stuff, this
requires a lot of buy in from a wide range of parties. Keeping the
protocol behind closed doors and with a mysterious future sabotages
this. Transparency is, I believe, a major requirement for
IANAL, but I believe Carl has volunteered to get legal clarifications on
any points you consider nebulous. I agree with you that the terms are
well intentioned, and intention is often the critical issue. The
objective of those who were in involved in the creation of this spec
(though I am not
James Strachan wrote:
On 7/19/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Holsman wrote:
Blaze is about only AMQP, a proposed standard for interoperable
messaging.
ActiveMQ implements multiple protocols. There is some disagreement
between
AMQP proponents and the ActiveMQ team regarding
James Strachan wrote:
I hope to see some collaboration further
down the line so that code can be reused across ActiveMQ and Blaze.
Agreed!
Paul Fremantle wrote:
I think it would be interesting to see a confluence of the APIs and
protocols between ActiveMQ and Blaze giving interoperability in
18 matches
Mail list logo
